Why isn't MCPS redistricting Rachel Carlson

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did it at King Farm too. When all these new developments are built, the developers set aside the land for an elementary school like they are supposed to and advertise to potential buyers about the new school planned to be built but then it never happens.

It's not all the developers' fault. The county planning commission and developers can set aside land for new school construction, but if MCPS doesn't choose to build anything, or the county doesn't approve construction, it won't get built. The whole process to approve and build a new school is sooooooo long that kids graduate from school and the parents give up. It's almost by design...

What exactly would the design be? That if they wait long enough, all of the kids go away, and the school is no longer necessary? That's obviously not the reality.

MCPS does not have enough money for school construction and modernization. That's the reality.

But the county still allows developers to build to increase numbers? Why is that?

The Planning Board and the County Council allow developers to build. It's not a MCPS decision.

Also, there is a development moratorium when enrollment is projected to exceed 120% of school capacity in the next 5 years. MCPS says that the Northwood, Gaithersburg, Einstein, and Wheaton clusters are projected to go over.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20141031/NEWS/141039752/-1/montgomery-school-officials-say-development&template=gazette

Except at the elementary level, they look to see if the average of elementary capacity in the cluster is overcapacity by 120%. So you could have one very overcapacity school with lots of new construction because neighboring schools are under-capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They did it at King Farm too. When all these new developments are built, the developers set aside the land for an elementary school like they are supposed to and advertise to potential buyers about the new school planned to be built but then it never happens.

It's not all the developers' fault. The county planning commission and developers can set aside land for new school construction, but if MCPS doesn't choose to build anything, or the county doesn't approve construction, it won't get built. The whole process to approve and build a new school is sooooooo long that kids graduate from school and the parents give up. It's almost by design...

What exactly would the design be? That if they wait long enough, all of the kids go away, and the school is no longer necessary? That's obviously not the reality.

MCPS does not have enough money for school construction and modernization. That's the reality.

But the county still allows developers to build to increase numbers? Why is that?

The Planning Board and the County Council allow developers to build. It's not a MCPS decision.

Also, there is a development moratorium when enrollment is projected to exceed 120% of school capacity in the next 5 years. MCPS says that the Northwood, Gaithersburg, Einstein, and Wheaton clusters are projected to go over.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20141031/NEWS/141039752/-1/montgomery-school-officials-say-development&template=gazette

Except at the elementary level, they look to see if the average of elementary capacity in the cluster is overcapacity by 120%. So you could have one very overcapacity school with lots of new construction because neighboring schools are under-capacity.

Exactly. And then MCPS doesn't redistrict, so that one overburdened school stays overburdened and remains vulnerable to influxes from new development.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Planning Board and the County Council allow developers to build. It's not a MCPS decision.

Also, there is a development moratorium when enrollment is projected to exceed 120% of school capacity in the next 5 years. MCPS says that the Northwood, Gaithersburg, Einstein, and Wheaton clusters are projected to go over.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20141031/NEWS/141039752/-1/montgomery-school-officials-say-development&template=gazette

Except at the elementary level, they look to see if the average of elementary capacity in the cluster is overcapacity by 120%. So you could have one very overcapacity school with lots of new construction because neighboring schools are under-capacity.

Yes, I think that's possible. Can you give an example of where that is actually happening, though? Also, what do you think the county should do about it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The Planning Board and the County Council allow developers to build. It's not a MCPS decision.

Also, there is a development moratorium when enrollment is projected to exceed 120% of school capacity in the next 5 years. MCPS says that the Northwood, Gaithersburg, Einstein, and Wheaton clusters are projected to go over.

http://www.gazette.net/article/20141031/NEWS/141039752/-1/montgomery-school-officials-say-development&template=gazette

Except at the elementary level, they look to see if the average of elementary capacity in the cluster is overcapacity by 120%. So you could have one very overcapacity school with lots of new construction because neighboring schools are under-capacity.

Yes, I think that's possible. Can you give an example of where that is actually happening, though? Also, what do you think the county should do about it?

There are several schools in my area (lower DCC) and throughout the county that have over 120% capacity. However, as far as I know, there is not halt to new development, unless the cluster as whole has elementary capacity over 120%. I would suggest that the county looks at capacity in the catchment area for each individual elementary school to make these decisions, since families moving to new developments won't have a choice to attend other schools in the cluster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

There are several schools in my area (lower DCC) and throughout the county that have over 120% capacity. However, as far as I know, there is not halt to new development, unless the cluster as whole has elementary capacity over 120%. I would suggest that the county looks at capacity in the catchment area for each individual elementary school to make these decisions, since families moving to new developments won't have a choice to attend other schools in the cluster.

I was wondering about specific schools. There are certainly elementary schools that are over 120% capacity. For example, Rachel Carson ES is at 144% of capacity, and Matsunaga ES is at 147% of capacity. However, as far as I know, there are no new residential plans awaiting approval that would affect either school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There are several schools in my area (lower DCC) and throughout the county that have over 120% capacity. However, as far as I know, there is not halt to new development, unless the cluster as whole has elementary capacity over 120%. I would suggest that the county looks at capacity in the catchment area for each individual elementary school to make these decisions, since families moving to new developments won't have a choice to attend other schools in the cluster.

I was wondering about specific schools. There are certainly elementary schools that are over 120% capacity. For example, Rachel Carson ES is at 144% of capacity, and Matsunaga ES is at 147% of capacity. However, as far as I know, there are no new residential plans awaiting approval that would affect either school.

A new elementary school is planned that will take part of the kids from Matsunaga.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There are several schools in my area (lower DCC) and throughout the county that have over 120% capacity. However, as far as I know, there is not halt to new development, unless the cluster as whole has elementary capacity over 120%. I would suggest that the county looks at capacity in the catchment area for each individual elementary school to make these decisions, since families moving to new developments won't have a choice to attend other schools in the cluster.

I was wondering about specific schools. There are certainly elementary schools that are over 120% capacity. For example, Rachel Carson ES is at 144% of capacity, and Matsunaga ES is at 147% of capacity. However, as far as I know, there are no new residential plans awaiting approval that would affect either school.

Wood Acres ES is currently at about 143% capacity, but will close for 18 months this December to undergo an expansion that will take it down to about 107% capacity. A concern in the community is that there is a current plan to redevelop Westbard (which feeds into Wood Acres) that could include a few thousand new residential units and potentially add hundreds of new students. I suppose a moratorium doesn't technically apply if an expansion is already in the works, and redevelopment plans are still at a nascent stage, but the prospect of blowing past 120% again in short order is troubling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There are several schools in my area (lower DCC) and throughout the county that have over 120% capacity. However, as far as I know, there is not halt to new development, unless the cluster as whole has elementary capacity over 120%. I would suggest that the county looks at capacity in the catchment area for each individual elementary school to make these decisions, since families moving to new developments won't have a choice to attend other schools in the cluster.

I was wondering about specific schools. There are certainly elementary schools that are over 120% capacity. For example, Rachel Carson ES is at 144% of capacity, and Matsunaga ES is at 147% of capacity. However, as far as I know, there are no new residential plans awaiting approval that would affect either school.

Wood Acres ES is currently at about 143% capacity, but will close for 18 months this December to undergo an expansion that will take it down to about 107% capacity. A concern in the community is that there is a current plan to redevelop Westbard (which feeds into Wood Acres) that could include a few thousand new residential units and potentially add hundreds of new students. I suppose a moratorium doesn't technically apply if an expansion is already in the works, and redevelopment plans are still at a nascent stage, but the prospect of blowing past 120% again in short order is troubling.

It would be nice if the county looked proactively at redistricting if there are neighboring schools that are undercapacity or that could be expanded (since Wood Acres will be overcapacity even after the expansion) instead of waiting for new development to create a crisis. But I don't see any leadership on that front.

[Anonymous]

Dr. Starr is also recommending a feasibility study to explore ways to relieve overutilization at Rachel Carson Elementary School. Currently, Rachel Carson is more than 300 students over capacity and enrollment is expected to continue to grow. However, the school is not a viable location for an expansion project. Therefore, Dr. Starr is recommending the district explore additions to Jones Lane Elementary School and DuFief Elementary School, which could then alleviate the crowding at Rachel Carson.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?page=showrelease&id=3627

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dr. Starr is also recommending a feasibility study to explore ways to relieve overutilization at Rachel Carson Elementary School. Currently, Rachel Carson is more than 300 students over capacity and enrollment is expected to continue to grow. However, the school is not a viable location for an expansion project. Therefore, Dr. Starr is recommending the district explore additions to Jones Lane Elementary School and DuFief Elementary School, which could then alleviate the crowding at Rachel Carson.

http://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?page=showrelease&id=3627

But RIGHT NOW is when they need to start allowing the kids to go to Dufief. It is at 70% capacity. Why do they need to wait unlit the expansion. Supposedly the expansion is for Crown residents, NOT Rachel Carlson. He is full of it saying it is for Carson.

Anyone that is not in the Lakelands and Kentlands walkable areas should have ALREADY been redistricted to Dufief. If they are getting bussed in, send the busses to an under-capacity school. I mean, I am not even from that area but this is so frustrating how ass-backwards this county looks. This should have been dealt with this past summer.


And the key wording in the above is recommending the district "explore" additions

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

But RIGHT NOW is when they need to start allowing the kids to go to Dufief. It is at 70% capacity. Why do they need to wait unlit the expansion. Supposedly the expansion is for Crown residents, NOT Rachel Carlson. He is full of it saying it is for Carson.

Anyone that is not in the Lakelands and Kentlands walkable areas should have ALREADY been redistricted to Dufief. If they are getting bussed in, send the busses to an under-capacity school. I mean, I am not even from that area but this is so frustrating how ass-backwards this county looks. This should have been dealt with this past summer.

And the key wording in the above is recommending the district "explore" additions

Would you prefer it if MCPS recommended something before studying it, or without studying it?

Also, Dufief was at 77% capacity last year, not 70%. Dufief would be at 100% capacity with 98 more students than they had last year. Rachel Carson had 958 students last year and was at 144% of capacity. If 98 students had transferred from Rachel Carson to Dufief last year, Rachel Carson would have been at 129% of capacity. Or maybe 196 (twice 98) students could have transferred from Rachel Carson to Dufief last year, putting Rachel Carson at 114% of capacity and Dufief at 123% of capacity. I don't think that simply rezoning (not redistricting) students from Rachel Carson to Dufief, as things are right now, is a very effective solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But RIGHT NOW is when they need to start allowing the kids to go to Dufief. It is at 70% capacity. Why do they need to wait unlit the expansion. Supposedly the expansion is for Crown residents, NOT Rachel Carlson. He is full of it saying it is for Carson.

Anyone that is not in the Lakelands and Kentlands walkable areas should have ALREADY been redistricted to Dufief. If they are getting bussed in, send the busses to an under-capacity school. I mean, I am not even from that area but this is so frustrating how ass-backwards this county looks. This should have been dealt with this past summer.

And the key wording in the above is recommending the district "explore" additions

Would you prefer it if MCPS recommended something before studying it, or without studying it?

Also, Dufief was at 77% capacity last year, not 70%. Dufief would be at 100% capacity with 98 more students than they had last year. Rachel Carson had 958 students last year and was at 144% of capacity. If 98 students had transferred from Rachel Carson to Dufief last year, Rachel Carson would have been at 129% of capacity. Or maybe 196 (twice 98) students could have transferred from Rachel Carson to Dufief last year, putting Rachel Carson at 114% of capacity and Dufief at 123% of capacity. I don't think that simply rezoning (not redistricting) students from Rachel Carson to Dufief, as things are right now, is a very effective solution.

They are at 70% (maybe even below) this year. And yes, they should have moved the kids bussing into RC to D. No brainer. No school up the street from each other should be 70% at one and 160% at the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

They are at 70% (maybe even below) this year. And yes, they should have moved the kids bussing into RC to D. No brainer. No school up the street from each other should be 70% at one and 160% at the other.

Where are you getting the 70%/160% numbers from?

Also, what proportion of kids at Rachel Carson get bused? And are you suggesting that kids from the Governor Square apartments get bused to Dufief?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There are several schools in my area (lower DCC) and throughout the county that have over 120% capacity. However, as far as I know, there is not halt to new development, unless the cluster as whole has elementary capacity over 120%. I would suggest that the county looks at capacity in the catchment area for each individual elementary school to make these decisions, since families moving to new developments won't have a choice to attend other schools in the cluster.

I was wondering about specific schools. There are certainly elementary schools that are over 120% capacity. For example, Rachel Carson ES is at 144% of capacity, and Matsunaga ES is at 147% of capacity. However, as far as I know, there are no new residential plans awaiting approval that would affect either school.

Woodlin ES is over 120% capacity and there is new development in the works near the Silver Spring metro.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

There are several schools in my area (lower DCC) and throughout the county that have over 120% capacity. However, as far as I know, there is not halt to new development, unless the cluster as whole has elementary capacity over 120%. I would suggest that the county looks at capacity in the catchment area for each individual elementary school to make these decisions, since families moving to new developments won't have a choice to attend other schools in the cluster.

I was wondering about specific schools. There are certainly elementary schools that are over 120% capacity. For example, Rachel Carson ES is at 144% of capacity, and Matsunaga ES is at 147% of capacity. However, as far as I know, there are no new residential plans awaiting approval that would affect either school.

Woodlin ES is over 120% capacity and there is new development in the works near the Silver Spring metro.

What new development? What stage is it at?