8/27 APS Work Session—Elementary Boundaries

[Anonymous]

PP here. Or move ATS to upper NW. We really need equitable access to plum option programs for the 1%. That’s what moving these schools to affluent Tuckahoe or Nottingham would do. No one will send their kids across the county. So NW parents will have these options to themselves. That’ll play well in the Post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed will be a neighborhood school. This is from this week's presentation:

PROJECT PARAMETERS
Create a new neighborhood elementary school
with an attendance zone

I get that many of you don't like it but it's time to move on.

And from the APS Reed website:
On Nov. 17, 2018, the County Board approved a use permit amendment to renovate and expand the existing Reed School/Westover Library to create a neighborhood elementary school.

What presentation from this week are you looking at? The presentation on Tuesday said this about Reed on page 18, "Elementary school planning is underway to prepare for the opening of a new school at Reed and new boundaries to take effect in 2021?22."

I concede that in previous presentations, etc. they always refer to Reed as a neighborhood school but they interestingly just said "a new" school this time around.

And who cares about what's on the APS website-- they still have the "swap" listed as an initiative even though APS made it clear the swap is dead during the meeting.

So yes, hold tight to your belief that Reed is completely immune from becoming an option location. Reed and its neighborhood are just that special.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Reed site has no bus lane, up to now it’s accommodated a few buses in the street parking lane. In order to accommodate 13 buses worth of option students, they’d have to raze the athletic fields, which are heavily used for baseball and soccer. Is it better for kids across the county to have field space be even more limited than it is now?

Too bad, so sad.

I don’t see why they need to raze the fields. ASFD is mostly bused and it’s bus lane holds 3 buses and it’s fine.

ASFS? They use both lanes of the circle for buses and seem to get 7-8 buses in there at once. They also have a block of no-parking street space for waiting buses to queue. And it’s still a CF.

ASFS does not use "both lanes" to get 7-8 buses in there at once-- a bus may be able to pass-through on the left if there are busses on the right (and it's a half-circle that can only hold 3 buses at a time) but they can't stop and drop children double-parked. And there is no block of no-parking street space-- there is half a block on one side of the street that is reserved for a drop off/pick up lane so the busses queue in the street (often blocking whoever is in the front of the drop-off/pick-up lane. And it can be a CF at times but guess what, it lasts no more than 5 minutes and then all is right with the world. I'm sure folks around Reed could adjust twice a day for a few minutes during drop offs and pick ups, especially since they can use their parking lot (ASFS' lot is too small to hold buses/is closed off during drop-off and pick-ups).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reed will be a neighborhood school. This is from this week's presentation:

PROJECT PARAMETERS
Create a new neighborhood elementary school
with an attendance zone

I get that many of you don't like it but it's time to move on.

And from the APS Reed website:
On Nov. 17, 2018, the County Board approved a use permit amendment to renovate and expand the existing Reed School/Westover Library to create a neighborhood elementary school.

What presentation from this week are you looking at? The presentation on Tuesday said this about Reed on page 18, "Elementary school planning is underway to prepare for the opening of a new school at Reed and new boundaries to take effect in 2021?22."

I concede that in previous presentations, etc. they always refer to Reed as a neighborhood school but they interestingly just said "a new" school this time around.

And who cares about what's on the APS website-- they still have the "swap" listed as an initiative even though APS made it clear the swap is dead during the meeting.

So yes, hold tight to your belief that Reed is completely immune from becoming an option location. Reed and its neighborhood are just that special.

No they dont. This is on page one of Wednesday's presentation:
August 28, 2019 – Pre-Construction Community Meeting Presentation
PROJECT PARAMETERS
Create a new neighborhood elementary school
with an attendance zone

[Anonymous]

1) Reed will be a neighborhood school. Accept it and move on (as I am doing, despite being a Nottingham parent who would be less likely to change schools if they made Reed option).

2) There are no perfect solutions here, or even great ones. There are only options that make the best of the situation at hand. So if you’re claiming your proposed solution is awesome, stop being disingenuous. And if you’re saying a solution you don’t like is a non-starter because it’s not ideal, also stop being disingenuous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Or move ATS to upper NW. We really need equitable access to plum option programs for the 1%. That’s what moving these schools to affluent Tuckahoe or Nottingham would do. No one will send their kids across the county. So NW parents will have these options to themselves. That’ll play well in the Post.

Much better optics to ship kids from the metro corridors to inaccessible schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Or move ATS to upper NW. We really need equitable access to plum option programs for the 1%. That’s what moving these schools to affluent Tuckahoe or Nottingham would do. No one will send their kids across the county. So NW parents will have these options to themselves. That’ll play well in the Post.

Much better optics to ship kids from the metro corridors to inaccessible schools.

Yep, busing option kids to far corners will be far more tolerable then busing all the high density housing kids to their "neighborhood" school half a county away.

[Anonymous]

so What is going to happen to the cluster of title I schools in south Arlington? We know that Arlington forest will be removed from barcroft, but any possible way to change demographic concentrations? Or just make them even more poor while NW Arlington gets new schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so What is going to happen to the cluster of title I schools in south Arlington? We know that Arlington forest will be removed from barcroft, but any possible way to change demographic concentrations? Or just make them even more poor while NW Arlington gets new schools?

Go through any of many, many previous APS threads if you’d like to read lengthy debates on any of this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:so What is going to happen to the cluster of title I schools in south Arlington? We know that Arlington forest will be removed from barcroft, but any possible way to change demographic concentrations? Or just make them even more poor while NW Arlington gets new schools?

Yes, your last sentence is what will happen. Advocates will push for communities around Carlin Springs, Barcroft, and Randolph to keep their schools and everyone else will let it happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:so What is going to happen to the cluster of title I schools in south Arlington? We know that Arlington forest will be removed from barcroft, but any possible way to change demographic concentrations? Or just make them even more poor while NW Arlington gets new schools?

Yes, your last sentence is what will happen. Advocates will push for communities around Carlin Springs, Barcroft, and Randolph to keep their schools and everyone else will let it happen.

The best idea I have heard of to do this is to create bigger attendance zones with upper and lower schools. e.g.- Oakridge/Drew are one zone. K-2 to Drew/ 3-5 to Oakridge. Abingdon/Carlin Springs one zone. Fleet/ Barcroft one zone. Ashlawn/Barrett one zone.
If they were to try this idea, I don't think they would do it system wide- I think they would try it a couple places and see how it works.

They could also do this with immersion- K-2 at Claremont (which is closer to native speakers); then 3-5 at the ATS site, which is still not far from native speakers- and hopefully they are sold enough on immersion at that point to make it worthwhile to continue.

[Anonymous]

Nah, they will just keep the schools poor. Talents will whine and say that it would break up Spanish speaking communities and require busing. I thing will change

[Anonymous]

The Reed presentations simply echo the charge from the School Board to the PFRC/BLPC for a neighborhood school. The school board did make it official, but that doesn't mean they couldn't change their decision. But like others, I think putting ATS in the new school would trigger more people that Nottingham families fscing the tragedy of going to Tuckahoe (or vice versa, since it's actually Tuckahoe's boundary which Reed will empty).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’d be super to have Immersion in the NW. Key & Claremont are too far away!

Too far away from what? Key is a quick walk from parts of Lyon Village.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Or move ATS to upper NW. We really need equitable access to plum option programs for the 1%. That’s what moving these schools to affluent Tuckahoe or Nottingham would do. No one will send their kids across the county. So NW parents will have these options to themselves. That’ll play well in the Post.

Here's the thing- there is/ will be when Reed opens- Surplus space in the Northwest. There is severe overcrowding in the Rosslyn corridor. Do you find it more palatable to move ATS to Nottingham (and immersion to ATS) recognizing that it will make it somewhat harder for some families to access ATS? Or do you find it more palatable to leave all option schools where they are- but make Reed/Tuckahoe/Nottingham/Mckinley/Ashlawn/Glebe all have narrow long boundaries so they feel less neighborhoody, and more stretched out. E.g. all boundaries would be like the Ashlawn tail.

If you think there is a better option that will relieve the overcrowding in the North east- by all means propose it. But recognize that 1) APS should find land where the school is needed is not a realistic option and 2) there may be future development around east falls church so lets just leave Tuckahoe etc severely undercapacity is also not a realistic option.