APS: Elementary Walk Zone surveys out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Then I suggest that you support Tuckahoe becoming an option school. I'm assuming that APS will continue to require continguous boundaries. If so- and the need for seats is in the NE, they have to find a way to draw the boundary so as to pick up some of the Key and Glebe units to the Northwest. Tuckahoe is up against the edge of the county- if its planning units move to Reed, there is no where else for it to draw planning units from. The units east of Reed are probably safe for at least enough to make a boundary corridor east. But under the all neighborhood scenario I don't see any way units 16040 16050 and 16060 and 16130 could go to Reed- and they are all within the 1/2 mile walk shed. I live in one of those units, and think the neighborhood is really misguided to be fighting against Tuckahoe going choice, while fully expecting that we are headed to walkable Reed.
-------------------
Um. Because I think they don't want to actively fight to take away their friends' and neighbors' neighborhood school.

How well did that work out for McKinley?

[Anonymous]

I am looking at the boundary map and also at the capacity forecasts. https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/ESZones_Letter_2017_Revised2-1.pdf
Right now both Barrett and Glebe have relatively concentric close boundaries. I cannot imagine that any of the units currently zoned to either of these schools are going to be happy about moving- and they would all probably involve turning walkers into busriders, which I have learned violates the current gospel of APS.
The Jamestown boundary already stretches about as far east as it can, without picking up Taylor walkers.
Similarly the discovery boundary goes as far east as it can without picking up Glebe walkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When considering Tuckahoe as countywide option, is everyone aware that it would require navigating the EFC metro intersection during rush hour and that Tuckahoe literally shares a street with Bishop O'Connell high school (1000 students, I think). Do not plan to drive your kid there.

+1
It's not a good option for choice, it really isn't. People need to put a brake on all the speculations, and wait for the actual boundary tool with the numbers to come out. Remember, we don't want *any* schools at 110% capacity only a few years later, and then go through this again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When considering Tuckahoe as countywide option, is everyone aware that it would require navigating the EFC metro intersection during rush hour and that Tuckahoe literally shares a street with Bishop O'Connell high school (1000 students, I think). Do not plan to drive your kid there.

+1
It's not a good option for choice, it really isn't. People need to put a brake on all the speculations, and wait for the actual boundary tool with the numbers to come out. Remember, we don't want *any* schools at 110% capacity only a few years later, and then go through this again.

Pretty sure they're never giving the public the boundary tool again after the high school boundary issue.

My guess is that they'll just maintain the status quo. Moving an option school, regardless of location, would create such an outcry from the parents at both the current location and the new location, that the board would be cowed into backing down. Never gonna happen, people. Never. They'll change a dozen boundaries before they actually move a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When considering Tuckahoe as countywide option, is everyone aware that it would require navigating the EFC metro intersection during rush hour and that Tuckahoe literally shares a street with Bishop O'Connell high school (1000 students, I think). Do not plan to drive your kid there.

+1
It's not a good option for choice, it really isn't. People need to put a brake on all the speculations, and wait for the actual boundary tool with the numbers to come out. Remember, we don't want *any* schools at 110% capacity only a few years later, and then go through this again.

Pretty sure they're never giving the public the boundary tool again after the high school boundary issue.

My guess is that they'll just maintain the status quo. Moving an option school, regardless of location, would create such an outcry from the parents at both the current location and the new location, that the board would be cowed into backing down. Never gonna happen, people. Never. They'll change a dozen boundaries before they actually move a school.

I think moving Key is a very real possibility. The question is whether that would be a direct switch with ASFS or a wider reaching change.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When considering Tuckahoe as countywide option, is everyone aware that it would require navigating the EFC metro intersection during rush hour and that Tuckahoe literally shares a street with Bishop O'Connell high school (1000 students, I think). Do not plan to drive your kid there.

These are some of the Alternative Facts Tuckahoe families like to share. It sounds like the Tuckahoe PTA has hired Sean Spicer as press secretary. Just look at a map, see where Reed is. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that Tuckahoe will be the option school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That would be absurd. Many of those houses were once zoned for Tuckahoe and rezoned for McK. Now that there will actually be a school in walking distance you think they'd go back to Tuckahoe? I would fight like hell against that.

Then I suggest that you support Tuckahoe becoming an option school. I'm assuming that APS will continue to require continguous boundaries. If so- and the need for seats is in the NE, they have to find a way to draw the boundary so as to pick up some of the Key and Glebe units to the Northwest. Tuckahoe is up against the edge of the county- if its planning units move to Reed, there is no where else for it to draw planning units from. The units east of Reed are probably safe for at least enough to make a boundary corridor east. But under the all neighborhood scenario I don't see any way units 16040 16050 and 16060 and 16130 could go to Reed- and they are all within the 1/2 mile walk shed. I live in one of those units, and think the neighborhood is really misguided to be fighting against Tuckahoe going choice, while fully expecting that we are headed to walkable Reed.

All of those planning units are across Lee Highway, which is designated as a road that elementary children may not cross. Making those units walkable to Tuckahoe would require putting a crossing guard at the intersection of Lee Highway and Sycamore, which is never going to happen because it's too dangerous a place for someone to just walk out into the middle of the intersection and expect speeding rush hour cars to stop.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That would be absurd. Many of those houses were once zoned for Tuckahoe and rezoned for McK. Now that there will actually be a school in walking distance you think they'd go back to Tuckahoe? I would fight like hell against that.

Then I suggest that you support Tuckahoe becoming an option school. I'm assuming that APS will continue to require continguous boundaries. If so- and the need for seats is in the NE, they have to find a way to draw the boundary so as to pick up some of the Key and Glebe units to the Northwest. Tuckahoe is up against the edge of the county- if its planning units move to Reed, there is no where else for it to draw planning units from. The units east of Reed are probably safe for at least enough to make a boundary corridor east. But under the all neighborhood scenario I don't see any way units 16040 16050 and 16060 and 16130 could go to Reed- and they are all within the 1/2 mile walk shed. I live in one of those units, and think the neighborhood is really misguided to be fighting against Tuckahoe going choice, while fully expecting that we are headed to walkable Reed.

All of those planning units are across Lee Highway, which is designated as a road that elementary children may not cross. Making those units walkable to Tuckahoe would require putting a crossing guard at the intersection of Lee Highway and Sycamore, which is never going to happen because it's too dangerous a place for someone to just walk out into the middle of the intersection and expect speeding rush hour cars to stop.

precisely- they are not walkable to Tuckahoe- they are current busriders to Tuckahoe. They are walkable to Reed. If all of the North West schools are neighborhood schools- those units will have to stay as busriders to Tuckahoe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That would be absurd. Many of those houses were once zoned for Tuckahoe and rezoned for McK. Now that there will actually be a school in walking distance you think they'd go back to Tuckahoe? I would fight like hell against that.

Then I suggest that you support Tuckahoe becoming an option school. I'm assuming that APS will continue to require continguous boundaries. If so- and the need for seats is in the NE, they have to find a way to draw the boundary so as to pick up some of the Key and Glebe units to the Northwest. Tuckahoe is up against the edge of the county- if its planning units move to Reed, there is no where else for it to draw planning units from. The units east of Reed are probably safe for at least enough to make a boundary corridor east. But under the all neighborhood scenario I don't see any way units 16040 16050 and 16060 and 16130 could go to Reed- and they are all within the 1/2 mile walk shed. I live in one of those units, and think the neighborhood is really misguided to be fighting against Tuckahoe going choice, while fully expecting that we are headed to walkable Reed.

All of those planning units are across Lee Highway, which is designated as a road that elementary children may not cross. Making those units walkable to Tuckahoe would require putting a crossing guard at the intersection of Lee Highway and Sycamore, which is never going to happen because it's too dangerous a place for someone to just walk out into the middle of the intersection and expect speeding rush hour cars to stop.

precisely- they are not walkable to Tuckahoe- they are current busriders to Tuckahoe. They are walkable to Reed. If all of the North West schools are neighborhood schools- those units will have to stay as busriders to Tuckahoe.

Ah yes, I lost track of where this was in the discussion. I agree those units probably stay at Tuckahoe if they don't move a choice program to the NW region, but I don't think it's because they're within the 1/2 mile walk shed, that's irrelevant because of Lee Highway. They'll stay at Tuckahoe because there's no where else for Tuckahoe to draw students to replace them without creating cascading busing needs through Nottingham, Discovery and Jamestown. All of those schools are on the same bell schedule, so they wouldn't even be able to share a bus fleet to reduce the burden on the transportation department.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That would be absurd. Many of those houses were once zoned for Tuckahoe and rezoned for McK. Now that there will actually be a school in walking distance you think they'd go back to Tuckahoe? I would fight like hell against that.

Then I suggest that you support Tuckahoe becoming an option school. I'm assuming that APS will continue to require continguous boundaries. If so- and the need for seats is in the NE, they have to find a way to draw the boundary so as to pick up some of the Key and Glebe units to the Northwest. Tuckahoe is up against the edge of the county- if its planning units move to Reed, there is no where else for it to draw planning units from. The units east of Reed are probably safe for at least enough to make a boundary corridor east. But under the all neighborhood scenario I don't see any way units 16040 16050 and 16060 and 16130 could go to Reed- and they are all within the 1/2 mile walk shed. I live in one of those units, and think the neighborhood is really misguided to be fighting against Tuckahoe going choice, while fully expecting that we are headed to walkable Reed.

All of those planning units are across Lee Highway, which is designated as a road that elementary children may not cross. Making those units walkable to Tuckahoe would require putting a crossing guard at the intersection of Lee Highway and Sycamore, which is never going to happen because it's too dangerous a place for someone to just walk out into the middle of the intersection and expect speeding rush hour cars to stop.

precisely- they are not walkable to Tuckahoe- they are current busriders to Tuckahoe. They are walkable to Reed. If all of the North West schools are neighborhood schools- those units will have to stay as busriders to Tuckahoe.

Ah yes, I lost track of where this was in the discussion. I agree those units probably stay at Tuckahoe if they don't move a choice program to the NW region, but I don't think it's because they're within the 1/2 mile walk shed, that's irrelevant because of Lee Highway. They'll stay at Tuckahoe because there's no where else for Tuckahoe to draw students to replace them without creating cascading busing needs through Nottingham, Discovery and Jamestown. All of those schools are on the same bell schedule, so they wouldn't even be able to share a bus fleet to reduce the burden on the transportation department.

This is why this is such a circular argument: if you can make Reed an almost entirely walkable school and the only argument for sending some of those kids to Tuckahoe is to fill up the school...then Tuckahoe needs to become the option school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That would be absurd. Many of those houses were once zoned for Tuckahoe and rezoned for McK. Now that there will actually be a school in walking distance you think they'd go back to Tuckahoe? I would fight like hell against that.

Then I suggest that you support Tuckahoe becoming an option school. I'm assuming that APS will continue to require continguous boundaries. If so- and the need for seats is in the NE, they have to find a way to draw the boundary so as to pick up some of the Key and Glebe units to the Northwest. Tuckahoe is up against the edge of the county- if its planning units move to Reed, there is no where else for it to draw planning units from. The units east of Reed are probably safe for at least enough to make a boundary corridor east. But under the all neighborhood scenario I don't see any way units 16040 16050 and 16060 and 16130 could go to Reed- and they are all within the 1/2 mile walk shed. I live in one of those units, and think the neighborhood is really misguided to be fighting against Tuckahoe going choice, while fully expecting that we are headed to walkable Reed.

All of those planning units are across Lee Highway, which is designated as a road that elementary children may not cross. Making those units walkable to Tuckahoe would require putting a crossing guard at the intersection of Lee Highway and Sycamore, which is never going to happen because it's too dangerous a place for someone to just walk out into the middle of the intersection and expect speeding rush hour cars to stop.

precisely- they are not walkable to Tuckahoe- they are current busriders to Tuckahoe. They are walkable to Reed. If all of the North West schools are neighborhood schools- those units will have to stay as busriders to Tuckahoe.

Ah yes, I lost track of where this was in the discussion. I agree those units probably stay at Tuckahoe if they don't move a choice program to the NW region, but I don't think it's because they're within the 1/2 mile walk shed, that's irrelevant because of Lee Highway. They'll stay at Tuckahoe because there's no where else for Tuckahoe to draw students to replace them without creating cascading busing needs through Nottingham, Discovery and Jamestown. All of those schools are on the same bell schedule, so they wouldn't even be able to share a bus fleet to reduce the burden on the transportation department.

This is why this is such a circular argument: if you can make Reed an almost entirely walkable school and the only argument for sending some of those kids to Tuckahoe is to fill up the school...then Tuckahoe needs to become the option school.

I agree with you that there's an opportunity to put a choice school there, but that's not the only aspect of the discussion. We also have to consider which school would move there. Creating new choice programs is not on the table, the SB has been very clear about that, so which existing program could we move to that part of the county (regardless of which school it would be, let's set that aside for a moment) where relocating the school wouldn't have a significant negative affect on the program itself or the school population? I know the SB said they're not going to reach those decisions in the first stage, that the first stage will only be deciding which sites should be neighborhood and which sites should be choice and that which choice programs go where will be the second stage, but we all know they're at least thinking about where schools could move (e.g., they couldn't make Campbell a neighborhood school without consideration of whether there's a suitable alternative location for the Expeditionary Learning program).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So maybe then some of this choice schools shouldn't exist anymore. Aren't some of them a relic of a past era when Arlington needed to retain students rather than having too many? Aren't neighborhood schools what everyone wants now?

Neighborhood schools? My sense is that it breaks down like this:

North Arlington by and large wants neighborhood schools, because they can afford to live there, high income students produce high test scores which in turn support high property values. And its a means to keep lower income students out and their lower test scores out. Sorry, it's the truth.

Old timers in Nauck - the civic association -- wants a neighborhood school because when bussing happened in the 1970s it put the burden on Nauck residents, making them bus out rather than bussing white students in. Now the neighborhood is only a third African American and that's probably including recent African immigrants, which don't have that history. Still, it's a big reason Montessori is leaving Drew and the entire reason that Drew is off the table for consideration as an option school going forward.

People who claim to speak for low income Hispanic families say they want neighborhood schools too, for cultural familiarity and convenience.

The middle and upper middle class in south Arlington (me) would like to send our kids to schools that aren't overwhelmingly poor, because common sense tells you that absent tracking, a student body that is 80% disadvantaged and needs all the help it can get will come first every time in terms of resources, classroom pacing. If that's neighborhood schools like Oakridge great. If its option schools, also great. The travel hassle is worth it. Option schools like Campbell and Claremont (which are still 40% disadvantaged) are what keeps those families in Arlington. If one says, good riddance, go to fairfax, fine, but there's no moral difference between them and north Arlington parents. The latter are just wealthy enough to avoid such dilemmas. At least south Arlington parents are willing to live among people different than themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So maybe then some of this choice schools shouldn't exist anymore. Aren't some of them a relic of a past era when Arlington needed to retain students rather than having too many? Aren't neighborhood schools what everyone wants now?

Neighborhood schools? My sense is that it breaks down like this:

North Arlington by and large wants neighborhood schools, because they can afford to live there, high income students produce high test scores which in turn support high property values. And its a means to keep lower income students out and their lower test scores out. Sorry, it's the truth.

Old timers in Nauck - the civic association -- wants a neighborhood school because when bussing happened in the 1970s it put the burden on Nauck residents, making them bus out rather than bussing white students in. Now the neighborhood is only a third African American and that's probably including recent African immigrants, which don't have that history. Still, it's a big reason Montessori is leaving Drew and the entire reason that Drew is off the table for consideration as an option school going forward.

People who claim to speak for low income Hispanic families say they want neighborhood schools too, for cultural familiarity and convenience.

The middle and upper middle class in south Arlington (me) would like to send our kids to schools that aren't overwhelmingly poor, because common sense tells you that absent tracking, a student body that is 80% disadvantaged and needs all the help it can get will come first every time in terms of resources, classroom pacing. If that's neighborhood schools like Oakridge great. If its option schools, also great. The travel hassle is worth it. Option schools like Campbell and Claremont (which are still 40% disadvantaged) are what keeps those families in Arlington. If one says, good riddance, go to fairfax, fine, but there's no moral difference between them and north Arlington parents. The latter are just wealthy enough to avoid such dilemmas. At least south Arlington parents are willing to live among people different than themselves.

Oh good, Sanctimonious South Arlington Poster is back! Are you Bitter McKinley Parent's sidekick, or is it the other way around?

[Anonymous]

I have no clue what’s going to happen to ASFS. I see no viable boundary solution for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So maybe then some of this choice schools shouldn't exist anymore. Aren't some of them a relic of a past era when Arlington needed to retain students rather than having too many? Aren't neighborhood schools what everyone wants now?

Neighborhood schools? My sense is that it breaks down like this:

North Arlington by and large wants neighborhood schools, because they can afford to live there, high income students produce high test scores which in turn support high property values. And its a means to keep lower income students out and their lower test scores out. Sorry, it's the truth.

Old timers in Nauck - the civic association -- wants a neighborhood school because when bussing happened in the 1970s it put the burden on Nauck residents, making them bus out rather than bussing white students in. Now the neighborhood is only a third African American and that's probably including recent African immigrants, which don't have that history. Still, it's a big reason Montessori is leaving Drew and the entire reason that Drew is off the table for consideration as an option school going forward.

People who claim to speak for low income Hispanic families say they want neighborhood schools too, for cultural familiarity and convenience.

The middle and upper middle class in south Arlington (me) would like to send our kids to schools that aren't overwhelmingly poor, because common sense tells you that absent tracking, a student body that is 80% disadvantaged and needs all the help it can get will come first every time in terms of resources, classroom pacing. If that's neighborhood schools like Oakridge great. If its option schools, also great. The travel hassle is worth it. Option schools like Campbell and Claremont (which are still 40% disadvantaged) are what keeps those families in Arlington. If one says, good riddance, go to fairfax, fine, but there's no moral difference between them and north Arlington parents. The latter are just wealthy enough to avoid such dilemmas. At least south Arlington parents are willing to live among people different than themselves.

N Arlington north of Lee Highway is insulated from all this drama.