APS: New High School forum tonight 7-9 pm at Yorktown

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The SB needs to facilitate conversation between communities. I did not see the Glen Carlin meeting widely advertised.

Does anyone have my minutes from it? Really looking to understand what their concern is other than 'traffic' -- which is a county wife problem (and looked at google maps at 8am carlin springs was green, so is there a different choke point?)

Neither this nor the GC event were official SB functions. Both were hosted by local schools or civic associations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get it why Kenmore has to be a neighborhood HS. If it won't have all the ammenities in the beginning, why not make it an option school? Then, those who don't care about a pool or would prefer a smaller school, can elect to go there. It seems so obvious!

When it is first built as 1300 seats it won't be a neighborhood school.

So the equity argument isn't valid.

APS and the School Board have explicitly stated that IF the Kenmore or Career Center sites are chosen, they would have a defined boundary. I don't believe they have explained WHY it could not be a choice program in either of those locations, but that is what they have decided. So while I support the idea of a choice program school being built at either site now that could eventually grow to be comprehensive in the future, I do not support building a "less than" school with a defined boundary, at least not until a clear community process has taken place that guarantees access for all students, regardless of boundary, to equitable amenities.

That said, I have told the Glen Carlyn neighborhood residents I know that they should be organizing to shape the inevitable development rather than attempting to block it. If their stance is only "we don't want anything," they're going to wind up without a say. The county is not just going to sit on its large parcels of land.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody in North Arlington seems to know why people in South Arlington hate the Kenmore idea. I'm sorry, but North Arlington people on my team, doesn't that give you pause a bit?

Did you hear Lois at the meeting last night saying a 4th Comprehensive probably wouldn't get a full football field or a pool? If we were putting a school like that in North Arlington, you think parents would sit for that?

The School Board came up with these 3 options of Kenmore, the Ed Center, and Arlington Tech space, but apparently there had been two others that were nixed because a high school would have been located too close to an elementary school. But that's essentially what Kenmore will be left with EVEN IF the middle school is eventually moved out of that space, which there is no immediate plan to do, meaning that there will be 3 schools basically on top of one another. Don't we care about that issue just as much if it's in the south?

It's all good and well of you to say to take the parking spaces out so high schoolers won't drive, but I don't see you rushing to take them out of W-L or Yorktown. So there is more inequity.

Is it true that there are no/few bike racks at Kenmore because traffic is so nuts that they don't want to encourage bike riding since it will result in accidents?

It is rich for people in the North to keep talking about "the greater good" when they are not being asked to sacrifice their parks and their amenities. I am one of those people in the North who is pro-Kenmore as a fourth site! But we can't keep dismissing the actual concerns of the people who live in the affected area! Did any of us go to the Glen Carlyn meeting to hear what those concerns were? No! WTF is wrong with us?

I don't know whether they have bike racks, but I believe they would discourage this mode of transport because it's definitely not safe to bike in this area. Even walkers face a safety challenge. The sidewalks are narrow and right up against the road. In most places there's not even a grassy strip separating cars whizzing past from the sidewalk. Just a curb. You are a foot or two from passing cars. People also drive like maniacs on this road, and I think we need more traffic calming measures now (lights, or something). I'd encourage everyone to drive down here and notice how close many of the homes are to the road. That could be an issue with being able to widen the road and/or improve sidewalks. Notice how many homes have boulders in front of their houses. This is because these homes have repeatedly had cars smash into them, or drive through their yards. Independent of the high school conversation, I think the county needs to make this area safer for the students who are walkers now.

Seems like a lot of people who are quickly dismissing this as a mere traffic issue haven't read comments like this one. It's a safety issue, specifically safety of the kids who are walking to school in the middle of the crazy traffic.

The County Board has said they have many options. They could, as an example build several pedestrian bridges. This would be an overall improvement for that entire neighborhood's safety, not just for the school. Lots of schools have bad traffic. If you have to cross Glebe Road, it is really scary! That is also what crossing guards are for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And if I were outnumbered 40-2 at a meeting, I would probably also take up valuable time at the end of the meeting representing my POV to people who either didn't seem to be listening to a word I had said or didn't care.

Interrupting people is ok as long as you are outnumbered? They had no succinct points -- they were just angry and talked about traffic.

I'm not sure why you're so angry at these people, but other people interrupted the moderator last night to get their points in. Granted, they didn't do it during someone else's question, and I'm not saying it was right. I'm just saying I understand it. I'd be upset too if everyone was arguing in favor of something and didn't seem to be listening to how it would hurt me. All the people at this Yorktown meeting should have gone to the Glen Carlin meeting instead; it might have done more good.

"No succinct points"? Sheesh, it's a community meeting, not a trial.

At least one of the GL participants had students graduate from HB -- they aren't impacted at all by school quality and just want to preserve the status quo - NIMBY all the way. Suspect other GL also had students who were aging out -- they got theirs and now want to deny a reasonable high school experience for the next generation of families. Because of traffic.

Let me remind everyone of last year's Glencarlyn/Glen Forest survey on the possible land swap idea. My favorite comment: "I like it the way it is." http://www.glencarlyn.org/Files/FinalReportJuly2016GCFGSurvey.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Wow.

These were both points that were argued last night, I didn't just pull them out of thin air.

You felt free to attribute a whole lot of things to me that I never said, nor do I believe, assigned me to a geographic area to which I do not belong, and did it all while lecturing me on how I needed to understand other perspectives.

Wait, do you live in the Kenmore area? Because you didn't seem to understand the perspective of the people who attended last night's meeting who are arguing against it.

Sorry if you're not from Yorktown. But there were a whole bunch of people from Yorktown at the meeting last night (and here) arguing their own perspective and not seeming to listen to the people who would be affected. My point is, shouldn't we understand this before we argue to force this on people at Kenmore?

[Anonymous]

*gagging at dismissal of Kenmore traffic concerns being a "county wife" problem*

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody in North Arlington seems to know why people in South Arlington hate the Kenmore idea. I'm sorry, but North Arlington people on my team, doesn't that give you pause a bit?

Did you hear Lois at the meeting last night saying a 4th Comprehensive probably wouldn't get a full football field or a pool? If we were putting a school like that in North Arlington, you think parents would sit for that?

The School Board came up with these 3 options of Kenmore, the Ed Center, and Arlington Tech space, but apparently there had been two others that were nixed because a high school would have been located too close to an elementary school. But that's essentially what Kenmore will be left with EVEN IF the middle school is eventually moved out of that space, which there is no immediate plan to do, meaning that there will be 3 schools basically on top of one another. Don't we care about that issue just as much if it's in the south?

It's all good and well of you to say to take the parking spaces out so high schoolers won't drive, but I don't see you rushing to take them out of W-L or Yorktown. So there is more inequity.

Is it true that there are no/few bike racks at Kenmore because traffic is so nuts that they don't want to encourage bike riding since it will result in accidents?

It is rich for people in the North to keep talking about "the greater good" when they are not being asked to sacrifice their parks and their amenities. I am one of those people in the North who is pro-Kenmore as a fourth site! But we can't keep dismissing the actual concerns of the people who live in the affected area! Did any of us go to the Glen Carlyn meeting to hear what those concerns were? No! WTF is wrong with us?

I don't know whether they have bike racks, but I believe they would discourage this mode of transport because it's definitely not safe to bike in this area. Even walkers face a safety challenge. The sidewalks are narrow and right up against the road. In most places there's not even a grassy strip separating cars whizzing past from the sidewalk. Just a curb. You are a foot or two from passing cars. People also drive like maniacs on this road, and I think we need more traffic calming measures now (lights, or something). I'd encourage everyone to drive down here and notice how close many of the homes are to the road. That could be an issue with being able to widen the road and/or improve sidewalks. Notice how many homes have boulders in front of their houses. This is because these homes have repeatedly had cars smash into them, or drive through their yards. Independent of the high school conversation, I think the county needs to make this area safer for the students who are walkers now.

Seems like a lot of people who are quickly dismissing this as a mere traffic issue haven't read comments like this one. It's a safety issue, specifically safety of the kids who are walking to school in the middle of the crazy traffic.

I think this is because the residents who are being vocal right now are framing it as a traffic concern. That's because they're older and don't have kids in school (Kenmore wasn't even there when their kids were in school) and maybe they aren't even aware of what it's like for the current students. I'll just say that I've driven past Kenmore a few times after dismissal and have been very concerned about how close the kids are to the traffic as they walk home, and I could easily imagine kids horsing around and one getting knocked into traffic. It really scares me.

Also, I think there have been some wild rumors going around about how the county plans to address traffic in this area, like re-routing the on/off ramps to 50 through the neighborhood, and building roads through the park to create a "backside" entrance to the VHC parcel. I have a hard time believing these to be true, but that chatter is out there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get it why Kenmore has to be a neighborhood HS. If it won't have all the ammenities in the beginning, why not make it an option school? Then, those who don't care about a pool or would prefer a smaller school, can elect to go there. It seems so obvious!

When it is first built as 1300 seats it won't be a neighborhood school.

So the equity argument isn't valid.

APS and the School Board have explicitly stated that IF the Kenmore or Career Center sites are chosen, they would have a defined boundary. I don't believe they have explained WHY it could not be a choice program in either of those locations, but that is what they have decided.

This makes no sense to me. If it's only a 1300 seat school, why can't it be a choice program? I get that we will need another neighborhood school,but if the budget only allows for a "less than" school at THIS time, making it choice makes sense. Then, when they get more $/land, it can be converted to the full size and made into a neighborhood school.

This waiting until the next CIP idea is the same type of incompetence that got us in this situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get it why Kenmore has to be a neighborhood HS. If it won't have all the ammenities in the beginning, why not make it an option school? Then, those who don't care about a pool or would prefer a smaller school, can elect to go there. It seems so obvious!

When it is first built as 1300 seats it won't be a neighborhood school.

So the equity argument isn't valid.

APS and the School Board have explicitly stated that IF the Kenmore or Career Center sites are chosen, they would have a defined boundary. I don't believe they have explained WHY it could not be a choice program in either of those locations, but that is what they have decided.

This makes no sense to me. If it's only a 1300 seat school, why can't it be a choice program? I get that we will need another neighborhood school,but if the budget only allows for a "less than" school at THIS time, making it choice makes sense. Then, when they get more $/land, it can be converted to the full size and made into a neighborhood school.

This waiting until the next CIP idea is the same type of incompetence that got us in this situation.

I asked this exact in the survey. It seems like they were making two of the options intentionally less attractive, so they'd have data showing community support for their decision to ultimately build at the Ed Center site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Also, I think there have been some wild rumors going around about how the county plans to address traffic in this area, like re-routing the on/off ramps to 50 through the neighborhood, and building roads through the park to create a "backside" entrance to the VHC parcel. I have a hard time believing these to be true, but that chatter is out there.

James Lander stated this at the School Board debate in Westover a few weeks ago, which I attended. I don't know how concrete the plans are, but he stated they were being explored. He also made it sound like it was inevitable that more seats would be added to the Kenmore site at some point in the next decade. The question is do we put the 1300 seats there now (for 2022) or build those somewhere else and build out Kenmore in the 5-10 year window.

[Anonymous]

Reid said repeatedly that nothing is decided yet. If we choose to believe that, I think the choice school now / comprehensive eventually argument can be made. Reid and Barbara both said they welcome ideas from the community - so make them and see where you get. It's all any of us can do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's what I don't understand: what is the *affirmative* case for putting those seats at the Ed Center? I understand the Kenmore site has a lot of drawbacks. For all the reasons stated, it seems like the least bad of some pretty questionable options. But, am I missing why NVD and others affirmatively think the Ed Center is a *good* idea? Or do they just view it as a less bad option than Kenmore?

That's a good question. I think that's what it is--a less bad option? Or an equally bad option that's less costly and complicated to execute? Also, I think the survey that went out before the last boundary process, in which (IIRC) current W-L families supported the idea of a 9th grade academy over extensive boundary changes played into this. So, I think W-L is a "victim of its own success" or perceived popularity, in a way.

I think this is a lot of it. SB figures they won't have as much of a boundary fight with this option, just pull more people into W-L since they just fought about being pulled out of it. Who care if the experience sucks for the kids who have to go there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get it why Kenmore has to be a neighborhood HS. If it won't have all the ammenities in the beginning, why not make it an option school? Then, those who don't care about a pool or would prefer a smaller school, can elect to go there. It seems so obvious!

When it is first built as 1300 seats it won't be a neighborhood school.

So the equity argument isn't valid.

APS and the School Board have explicitly stated that IF the Kenmore or Career Center sites are chosen, they would have a defined boundary. I don't believe they have explained WHY it could not be a choice program in either of those locations, but that is what they have decided.

This makes no sense to me. If it's only a 1300 seat school, why can't it be a choice program? I get that we will need another neighborhood school,but if the budget only allows for a "less than" school at THIS time, making it choice makes sense. Then, when they get more $/land, it can be converted to the full size and made into a neighborhood school.

This waiting until the next CIP idea is the same type of incompetence that got us in this situation.

The trouble with a 1300 choice program is what will have the demand to immediately fill 1300 seats to relieve capacity when it is needed? I recall earlier info did talk about choice programs but there's been so much push about the need for a neighborhood school that the CC and Kenmore options were proposed to be neighborhood schools but they're still stuck with a funding/land/size situation that makes it hard to build an equitable comprehensive HS.

It was mentioned at the CCPTA meeting this week that whatever the decision, that new school would have some sort of 'focus' in addition to pulling from the neighborhood so it sounds like it would allow for some degree of transfer into it (just as WL has IB and Wakefield has immersion and AP Capstone). It was suggested that a Kenmore HS might continue the Arts/Communications focus that currently exists at the MS and a HS at the CC would naturally have a science/tech focus since Arlington Tech is already there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Also, I think there have been some wild rumors going around about how the county plans to address traffic in this area, like re-routing the on/off ramps to 50 through the neighborhood, and building roads through the park to create a "backside" entrance to the VHC parcel. I have a hard time believing these to be true, but that chatter is out there.

James Lander stated this at the School Board debate in Westover a few weeks ago, which I attended. I don't know how concrete the plans are, but he stated they were being explored. He also made it sound like it was inevitable that more seats would be added to the Kenmore site at some point in the next decade. The question is do we put the 1300 seats there now (for 2022) or build those somewhere else and build out Kenmore in the 5-10 year window.

I thought he spoke about re-routing traffic at the backside of Kenmore, into Fairfax County. I think that's likely something that will have to be explored. But I think we're talking about two different things. Did he tell people that they'd have to build a road through the park and route traffic down a (currently) dead-end street to get access to the VHC parcel? Because that's what some are saying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get it why Kenmore has to be a neighborhood HS. If it won't have all the ammenities in the beginning, why not make it an option school? Then, those who don't care about a pool or would prefer a smaller school, can elect to go there. It seems so obvious!

When it is first built as 1300 seats it won't be a neighborhood school.

So the equity argument isn't valid.

APS and the School Board have explicitly stated that IF the Kenmore or Career Center sites are chosen, they would have a defined boundary. I don't believe they have explained WHY it could not be a choice program in either of those locations, but that is what they have decided.

This makes no sense to me. If it's only a 1300 seat school, why can't it be a choice program? I get that we will need another neighborhood school,but if the budget only allows for a "less than" school at THIS time, making it choice makes sense. Then, when they get more $/land, it can be converted to the full size and made into a neighborhood school.

This waiting until the next CIP idea is the same type of incompetence that got us in this situation.

The trouble with a 1300 choice program is what will have the demand to immediately fill 1300 seats to relieve capacity when it is needed? I recall earlier info did talk about choice programs but there's been so much push about the need for a neighborhood school that the CC and Kenmore options were proposed to be neighborhood schools but they're still stuck with a funding/land/size situation that makes it hard to build an equitable comprehensive HS.

It was mentioned at the CCPTA meeting this week that whatever the decision, that new school would have some sort of 'focus' in addition to pulling from the neighborhood so it sounds like it would allow for some degree of transfer into it (just as WL has IB and Wakefield has immersion and AP Capstone). It was suggested that a Kenmore HS might continue the Arts/Communications focus that currently exists at the MS and a HS at the CC would naturally have a science/tech focus since Arlington Tech is already there.

Why not make it a new HB? I live near WL now and think 4000 hs students in that tiny campus would be horrible. I would definitely send my kid to Kenmore more if it was another B.B.
Also, do a damn lottery then for the new school boundary so groups like Arlington Forrest can't lobby the SB. Personally I was not offended because every parent should be able to advocate for their kid. I am more offended by the damn Nottingham pta woman who tries to keep her school under crowded while others are crammed like McKinley,but I digress.

The whole process sucks. Why not provide options with more info so people aren't pushing gor plans with incorrect assumptions. For example, let us work with the correct numbers 2800 in kenmore not 3800. Also, telling glencqrlyn that all of the space near them will be taken up so start with a vision now before having it happen in a haphazard way. And letting other parents who live outside if elected now know the rezoning could move more kids into the edcenter.