Seneca Valley Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Am I reading it wrong -- do options 1 and 2 not even involve any changes for NW?

NW will also be involved in the Crown HS boundary study in a few years maybe they are planning to move stuff then?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this news?
"No option will provide full capacity relief for Clarksburg or Northwest high schools. It is anticipated that, capacity relief for Northwest High School will be provided in the future with the opening of Crown High School. A long-term plan for Clarksburg High School will be developed in a future CIP."

I think it's news. Currently Crown is in the CIP for RM, Quince Orchard, Wootton, and Gaithersburg.

Crown is going to need a 12 story building...

Maybe the thinking is that if you rezone some kids from Quince Orchard to Crown, then you can rezone some kids from Northwest to Quince Orchard.

I think this is what will happen. Maybe Darnestown and Diamond will be rezoned to Lakelands Park so that Lakelands Park MS doesn't have a split articulation with NW.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is this news?
"No option will provide full capacity relief for Clarksburg or Northwest high schools. It is anticipated that, capacity relief for Northwest High School will be provided in the future with the opening of Crown High School. A long-term plan for Clarksburg High School will be developed in a future CIP."

I think it's news. Currently Crown is in the CIP for RM, Quince Orchard, Wootton, and Gaithersburg.

Crown is going to need a 12 story building...

Maybe the thinking is that if you rezone some kids from Quince Orchard to Crown, then you can rezone some kids from Northwest to Quince Orchard.

I think this is what will happen. Maybe Darnestown and Diamond will be rezoned to Lakelands Park so that Lakelands Park MS doesn't have a split articulation with NW.

That would be nice!

I kind of assumed as a Diamond parent that we would eventually move to Crown. Between NW, QO, or Crown, I am supportive of any option that best balances things out for the BOE.

[Anonymous]

Option 4 is interesting ... I know people are resistant to change and are all OMG Seneca Valley - No! But, Seneca Valley is going to double in size and add a bunch of new, interesting programs, in addition to its IB program. It's going to be a different school for sure.

Anyway - I think this process is so complex that if people think their wishes will be listened to, well, someone else has different wishes. And with Crown in the wings and the eventual information from the outside consultant, we will be addressing the broader boundary/school utilization/school construction problem for the next 10 years at least. So the results here will just be the current adjustment, to keep us going for a while longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Option 4 is interesting ... I know people are resistant to change and are all OMG Seneca Valley - No! But, Seneca Valley is going to double in size and add a bunch of new, interesting programs, in addition to its IB program. It's going to be a different school for sure.

Anyway - I think this process is so complex that if people think their wishes will be listened to, well, someone else has different wishes. And with Crown in the wings and the eventual information from the outside consultant, we will be addressing the broader boundary/school utilization/school construction problem for the next 10 years at least. So the results here will just be the current adjustment, to keep us going for a while longer.

Won't be happening. It breaks the geography factor and doesn't meet the utilization goals. And whether we like it or not, the biggest issue here is overcrowding. At least NW will have Crown as a relief in the future but CHS won't have that. And with the ongoing development at Clarksburg, providing the needed capacity at CHS is going to be a huge criteria for MCPS. Due to land use CHS cannot expand its building anymore so there needs to be a viable solution. I think demographics should take a back seat on this one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dang Option #4... the lawyers are already being hired.

I know, right? My friend whose kid is at Little Bennett already said oh hell no. I can only imagine what the Darnestown parents are saying.

We feel similarly to our counterparts at Little Bennett. That boundary map takes the 2 schools farthest away from SVHS and busses them over 20 minutes in each direction for no aparent benefit other than demographics. I don't even know how they'd figure out the busses in that situation. At the Public Meeting they said that you'd see one option for each of the 4 criteria, and then a few options that combine criteria. I think Option #4 is the one that best fits demographics. If you look at the study, the bottom page outlines the results. Option 4 leaves 200 seats open at SVHS even after 5 years, which seems to defeat the point. That said, we'll all hold our breath until they make a decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I reading it wrong -- do options 1 and 2 not even involve any changes for NW?

Option 1 has all of Great Seneca Creek elementary going to Kings view (instead of split articulation). Then those kids go to NW. It looks like Option 2 is the same. That's the only difference I see.

Option 1:
Proposed High School Reassignments
Reassign Capt James E. Daly ES and Fox Chapel ES from Clarksburg HS to Seneca Valley HS

Proposed Middle School Reassignments
Reassign portion of Great Seneca Creek ES from Clemente MS to Kingsview MS

Option 2:
Proposed High School Reassignments
Reassign Capt James E. Daly ES and William B. Gibbs ES from Clarksburg HS to Seneca Valley HS

Proposed Middle School Reassignments
Reassign Fox Chapel ES from Neelsville MS to Rocky Hill MS
Reassign William B. Gibbs ES from Rocky Hill MS to Neelsville MS
Reassign portion of Great Seneca Creek ES from Clemente MS to Kingsview MS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dang Option #4... the lawyers are already being hired.

I know, right? My friend whose kid is at Little Bennett already said oh hell no. I can only imagine what the Darnestown parents are saying.

We feel similarly to our counterparts at Little Bennett. That boundary map takes the 2 schools farthest away from SVHS and busses them over 20 minutes in each direction for no aparent benefit other than demographics. I don't even know how they'd figure out the busses in that situation. At the Public Meeting they said that you'd see one option for each of the 4 criteria, and then a few options that combine criteria. I think Option #4 is the one that best fits demographics. If you look at the study, the bottom page outlines the results. Option 4 leaves 200 seats open at SVHS even after 5 years, which seems to defeat the point. That said, we'll all hold our breath until they make a decision.

Yes, option 4 is wildly ridiculous. It doesn't accomplish anything except even out the demographics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Option 4 is interesting ... I know people are resistant to change and are all OMG Seneca Valley - No! But, Seneca Valley is going to double in size and add a bunch of new, interesting programs, in addition to its IB program. It's going to be a different school for sure.

Anyway - I think this process is so complex that if people think their wishes will be listened to, well, someone else has different wishes. And with Crown in the wings and the eventual information from the outside consultant, we will be addressing the broader boundary/school utilization/school construction problem for the next 10 years at least. So the results here will just be the current adjustment, to keep us going for a while longer.

Won't be happening. It breaks the geography factor and doesn't meet the utilization goals. And whether we like it or not, the biggest issue here is overcrowding. At least NW will have Crown as a relief in the future but CHS won't have that. And with the ongoing development at Clarksburg, providing the needed capacity at CHS is going to be a huge criteria for MCPS. Due to land use CHS cannot expand its building anymore so there needs to be a viable solution. I think demographics should take a back seat on this one.

What does this mean? Clarksburg High School is on 63 acres. Subtract a few acres for the forest conservation easements, and that still leaves a whole lot of land. And while there's an argument that you only want high schools to be so big, the current capacity is 2,038, Northwest HS current capacity is 2,241, and they're building Seneca Valley HS for 2,500.

On the other hand, 20 years from now, Clarksburg HS will likely be UNDERenrolled...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dang Option #4... the lawyers are already being hired.

I know, right? My friend whose kid is at Little Bennett already said oh hell no. I can only imagine what the Darnestown parents are saying.

We feel similarly to our counterparts at Little Bennett. That boundary map takes the 2 schools farthest away from SVHS and busses them over 20 minutes in each direction for no aparent benefit other than demographics. I don't even know how they'd figure out the busses in that situation. At the Public Meeting they said that you'd see one option for each of the 4 criteria, and then a few options that combine criteria. I think Option #4 is the one that best fits demographics. If you look at the study, the bottom page outlines the results. Option 4 leaves 200 seats open at SVHS even after 5 years, which seems to defeat the point. That said, we'll all hold our breath until they make a decision.

The buses would pick up the kids in the Little Bennett service areas and drop them off at Seneca Valley HS in the mornings, then do the reverse in the afternoon. I know that sounds snarky, and I apologize, but really, that's all there is to it.

I didn't go all the way through the boundary options paper - did they publish maps of the current HS walk zones?

[Anonymous]

Hey! Check out the interactive maps feature!

https://mcpsgis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/PublicInformation/index.html?appid=8e721ff7cdd24b27a3754d72083d3e66

[Anonymous]

How likely is the BOE to ultimately throw away all the maps and reassign schools based on some 8th scheme, involving schools not currently included in the discussions?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How likely is the BOE to ultimately throw away all the maps and reassign schools based on some 8th scheme, involving schools not currently included in the discussions?

Basically zero. The scope of the boundary study is defined: the high schools and middle schools in the Clarksburg, Seneca Valley, and Northwest clusters.

http://gis.mcpsmd.org/boundarystudypdfs/SVHS_BOEAdoptedBoundaryStudy.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dang Option #4... the lawyers are already being hired.

I know, right? My friend whose kid is at Little Bennett already said oh hell no. I can only imagine what the Darnestown parents are saying.

We feel similarly to our counterparts at Little Bennett. That boundary map takes the 2 schools farthest away from SVHS and busses them over 20 minutes in each direction for no aparent benefit other than demographics. I don't even know how they'd figure out the busses in that situation. At the Public Meeting they said that you'd see one option for each of the 4 criteria, and then a few options that combine criteria. I think Option #4 is the one that best fits demographics. If you look at the study, the bottom page outlines the results. Option 4 leaves 200 seats open at SVHS even after 5 years, which seems to defeat the point. That said, we'll all hold our breath until they make a decision.

The buses would pick up the kids in the Little Bennett service areas and drop them off at Seneca Valley HS in the mornings, then do the reverse in the afternoon. I know that sounds snarky, and I apologize, but really, that's all there is to it.

I didn't go all the way through the boundary options paper - did they publish maps of the current HS walk zones?

I’m not an idiot, I know how busses work. What you described sounds simple, but bus routes are complicated. They have to get from one place to another within a bounded time span. Busses cost money to run. You have to figure out routes and pay people to drive them. Busses with longer routes have to get to their desitinations in a predetermined pattern. It’s not that simple.

[Anonymous]

Also, now, busses from Darnestown to NWHS pass other houses in NWHS. These busses would pass miles without seeing another house in their boundary.