APS Closing Nottingham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Nottingham “community’s concerns” are and historically have in the past been those of a bunch of over privileged richer parents who dig in whenever anything slightly bad is sent their way. Just deal, please, like other school communities have done. Your kids will be fine at Discovery and other nearby schools, and I for one (anndbo suspect many others here) are tired of listening to you whine. Being upset about your kids going to Discovery is really the most ridiculous champagne problem on this board right now.

3 people killed right outside Nottingham isn't my definition of slightly bad, but ok.

Get a couple of crossing guards? Seems like an easy fix?

I mean, people in this neighborhood have been advocating vigorously for ten years now, but sure, there's probably an easy fix that everyone just ignored.

Wouldn’t shock me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This “highly walkable neighborhood school” has been significantly underenrolled for years. And it’s getting worse, not better with fewer than 50 kids in K. So that data alone combines with the two other “highly walkable” schools within a mile or so in each direction strongly supports the APS plan.

Undernrolled with trailers? That’s the only way you get “significantly.”

From all the kids I’m seeing around here, kids which are mysteriously missing from APS’ data, Tuckahoe and Discovery will likely be overcrowded on Day 1. Nottingham won’t be converted back until every single renovation on the books is done and a year-long redistricting is done. Kindergartners will be in HS before anything gets fixed.

Please tell me you’d sign up for overcrowding if it was for the “greater good” but not your kids. Go ahead. Show us how selfless and un-privileged you are.

I signed up for overcrowding as a member of McKinley when we were under renovations and you guys just COULD NOT manage to take on extra planning units. McKinley took them even though we were still having trailers and renovations didn't finish in time so as a PP said we were at approximately 125%. We took them because Nottingham put up a fight -- it was just going to be too hard for you all -- and you said you could not. (Just like you are saying now -- it's going to just be too hard!!) So please don't lecture me about how I wouldn't do something if it benefited the greater good. I would and I have.

Suck it up and deal like everyone else around you does. Tuckahoe and Taylor etc are great schools with great supports.

Planning units from Tuckahoe were moved to both Nottingham and McKinley. McKinley was getting a big new addition and Nottingham was not. So it made sense for McK to get more Tuckahoe kids than Nottingham as the school with more capacity. Nottingham parents are not to blame because APS didn't finish your renovations on time. Please. You need to complain about that to APS. But you won't. You have some irrational vendetta against Nottingham.

No. The numbers showed McK would be overcrowded and Nottingham could absorb the numbers, but the pushback was too aggressive. The planners caved and it was a mistake. I watched friend who should have been moved to Nottingham from Tuckahoe move to McK. They met new friends, but it was crazy that they were moved from one overcrowded school to another. In the end, they were kind of glad b/c Nottingham made them feel quite unwelcome.

[Anonymous]

I can understand the complaints from Nottingham parents. I just think the needs of other students in buildings that need renovation are greater.

[Anonymous]

APS is in a real pickle at this point!

[Anonymous]

Unless Nottingham parents were around ten years ago (when other Nottingham parents went nuclear about having more planning units assigned to Nottingham) they have no idea what people are talking about with that redistricting. I suggest to them that they take a history lesson because that redistricting is partly the reason Nottingham is underenrolled today. Many people from surrounding neighborhood schools have a horrible taste in their mouths from it. It was peak entitlement behavior.

Has APS thought out this plan in a careful and reasoned way? I doubt it. But there are no other realistic options if APS needs swing space. Nottingham needs to get at whether APS needs the swing space or whether it is some would be nice to have idea. Then they need to put their energy in making a good school environment in the three years before it is converted to that space. Or getting their kids into private schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This “highly walkable neighborhood school” has been significantly underenrolled for years. And it’s getting worse, not better with fewer than 50 kids in K. So that data alone combines with the two other “highly walkable” schools within a mile or so in each direction strongly supports the APS plan.

Undernrolled with trailers? That’s the only way you get “significantly.”

From all the kids I’m seeing around here, kids which are mysteriously missing from APS’ data, Tuckahoe and Discovery will likely be overcrowded on Day 1. Nottingham won’t be converted back until every single renovation on the books is done and a year-long redistricting is done. Kindergartners will be in HS before anything gets fixed.

Please tell me you’d sign up for overcrowding if it was for the “greater good” but not your kids. Go ahead. Show us how selfless and un-privileged you are.

I signed up for overcrowding as a member of McKinley when we were under renovations and you guys just COULD NOT manage to take on extra planning units. McKinley took them even though we were still having trailers and renovations didn't finish in time so as a PP said we were at approximately 125%. We took them because Nottingham put up a fight -- it was just going to be too hard for you all -- and you said you could not. (Just like you are saying now -- it's going to just be too hard!!) So please don't lecture me about how I wouldn't do something if it benefited the greater good. I would and I have.

Suck it up and deal like everyone else around you does. Tuckahoe and Taylor etc are great schools with great supports.

Planning units from Tuckahoe were moved to both Nottingham and McKinley. McKinley was getting a big new addition and Nottingham was not. So it made sense for McK to get more Tuckahoe kids than Nottingham as the school with more capacity. Nottingham parents are not to blame because APS didn't finish your renovations on time. Please. You need to complain about that to APS. But you won't. You have some irrational vendetta against Nottingham.

No. The numbers showed McK would be overcrowded and Nottingham could absorb the numbers, but the pushback was too aggressive. The planners caved and it was a mistake. I watched friend who should have been moved to Nottingham from Tuckahoe move to McK. They met new friends, but it was crazy that they were moved from one overcrowded school to another. In the end, they were kind of glad b/c Nottingham made them feel quite unwelcome.

Again, with the Nottingham bashing. I'm really sorry your friend didn't feel welcome. The Nottingham community is one of the most welcoming I've ever experienced so I don't understand where this is coming from except out of grudges and spite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Nottingham “community’s concerns” are and historically have in the past been those of a bunch of over privileged richer parents who dig in whenever anything slightly bad is sent their way. Just deal, please, like other school communities have done. Your kids will be fine at Discovery and other nearby schools, and I for one (anndbo suspect many others here) are tired of listening to you whine. Being upset about your kids going to Discovery is really the most ridiculous champagne problem on this board right now.

Please. Can we stop pretending that UMC households in Arlington have degrees of over privilege? The folks buying new builds in 22204 for $1.6m are not hard up. Average prices are what they are, folks. I very much doubt the ESL FARMS families are debating on this board. Take your high but not high enough earner insecurity somewhere else and try to engage in the merits, OK?

Why do you assume that PP has a lower HHI or home value than you do? Relativity of privilege is irrelevant and I fully agree with the PP. MANY communities of all HHIs have sucked up much worse scenarios.

Sure, but have they without at least having a discussion and asking questions? You can't possibly expect people not to put up a fight.

Yeah, I can. At least have a full discussion first. BTW, APS isn't going to answer all of your questions and concerns here on DCUM. Attend the meetings as they're scheduled and CIVILLY ask your questions and voice your concerns and LISTEN. AT the end of it all, you can still pushback; but yeah, I do expect people to advocate with a "fight," to acquiesce when the decision is done, and to move on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Nottingham “community’s concerns” are and historically have in the past been those of a bunch of over privileged richer parents who dig in whenever anything slightly bad is sent their way. Just deal, please, like other school communities have done. Your kids will be fine at Discovery and other nearby schools, and I for one (anndbo suspect many others here) are tired of listening to you whine. Being upset about your kids going to Discovery is really the most ridiculous champagne problem on this board right now.

Please. Can we stop pretending that UMC households in Arlington have degrees of over privilege? The folks buying new builds in 22204 for $1.6m are not hard up. Average prices are what they are, folks. I very much doubt the ESL FARMS families are debating on this board. Take your high but not high enough earner insecurity somewhere else and try to engage in the merits, OK?

Why do you assume that PP has a lower HHI or home value than you do? Relativity of privilege is irrelevant and I fully agree with the PP. MANY communities of all HHIs have sucked up much worse scenarios.

Sure, but have they without at least having a discussion and asking questions? You can't possibly expect people not to put up a fight.

Yeah, I can. At least have a full discussion first. BTW, APS isn't going to answer all of your questions and concerns here on DCUM. Attend the meetings as they're scheduled and CIVILLY ask your questions and voice your concerns and LISTEN. AT the end of it all, you can still pushback; but yeah, I do expect people to advocate with a "fight," to acquiesce when the decision is done, and to move on.

* without a fight

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This “highly walkable neighborhood school” has been significantly underenrolled for years. And it’s getting worse, not better with fewer than 50 kids in K. So that data alone combines with the two other “highly walkable” schools within a mile or so in each direction strongly supports the APS plan.

Undernrolled with trailers? That’s the only way you get “significantly.”

From all the kids I’m seeing around here, kids which are mysteriously missing from APS’ data, Tuckahoe and Discovery will likely be overcrowded on Day 1. Nottingham won’t be converted back until every single renovation on the books is done and a year-long redistricting is done. Kindergartners will be in HS before anything gets fixed.

Please tell me you’d sign up for overcrowding if it was for the “greater good” but not your kids. Go ahead. Show us how selfless and un-privileged you are.

I signed up for overcrowding as a member of McKinley when we were under renovations and you guys just COULD NOT manage to take on extra planning units. McKinley took them even though we were still having trailers and renovations didn't finish in time so as a PP said we were at approximately 125%. We took them because Nottingham put up a fight -- it was just going to be too hard for you all -- and you said you could not. (Just like you are saying now -- it's going to just be too hard!!) So please don't lecture me about how I wouldn't do something if it benefited the greater good. I would and I have.

Suck it up and deal like everyone else around you does. Tuckahoe and Taylor etc are great schools with great supports.

Hasn’t this version of events already been debunked upthread?

Nottingham contested that anyone directly pre-zoned from Nottingham was rezoned to McKinley (which was not "debunked" btw, was just protested by someone, and affirmed by someone who knew a Nottingham family who went to McKinley, so *shrug*). NOBODY has contested that McKinley took several planning units that were supposed to be rezoned to Nottingham but Nottingham made a fuss about how it would overcrowd them so instead those PUs went to McKinley's non-finished-building-in-the-middle-of-renovations, classes in trailers, and playground time in the parking lot. When the McKinley renovations finally did open the school was over capacity and kept the trailers for quite a while afterwards.

So when Nottingham complains about how they will be inconvenienced by having their kids walk to another nearby school that is also currently significantly under capacity, or bused to Jamestown which is also really under capacity, I can only hear the tiniest of violins playing for you all. You made this bed for yourselves by working yourselves up into a frenzy with the APE folks about covid closures and sending your kids to private, and being jerks to your neighboring schools over and over and over again. Now your school is underutilized when space is at a premium. Suck it up and deal.

Man, you have a warped sense of entitlement.

I'm not the one saying that I'm entitled to keep my neighborhood school running for fewer than 400 kids when it will fit 530, nearby schools have space and are walkable, and the county needs a building just like my school to put other kids in during renovations, but go off.

Exactly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Nottingham “community’s concerns” are and historically have in the past been those of a bunch of over privileged richer parents who dig in whenever anything slightly bad is sent their way. Just deal, please, like other school communities have done. Your kids will be fine at Discovery and other nearby schools, and I for one (anndbo suspect many others here) are tired of listening to you whine. Being upset about your kids going to Discovery is really the most ridiculous champagne problem on this board right now.

Please. Can we stop pretending that UMC households in Arlington have degrees of over privilege? The folks buying new builds in 22204 for $1.6m are not hard up. Average prices are what they are, folks. I very much doubt the ESL FARMS families are debating on this board. Take your high but not high enough earner insecurity somewhere else and try to engage in the merits, OK?

Why do you assume that PP has a lower HHI or home value than you do? Relativity of privilege is irrelevant and I fully agree with the PP. MANY communities of all HHIs have sucked up much worse scenarios.

Sure, but have they without at least having a discussion and asking questions? You can't possibly expect people not to put up a fight.

Yeah, I can. At least have a full discussion first. BTW, APS isn't going to answer all of your questions and concerns here on DCUM. Attend the meetings as they're scheduled and CIVILLY ask your questions and voice your concerns and LISTEN. AT the end of it all, you can still pushback; but yeah, I do expect people to advocate with a "fight," to acquiesce when the decision is done, and to move on.

Right, isn't that what we are doing?

Dcurbanmom isn't real life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This “highly walkable neighborhood school” has been significantly underenrolled for years. And it’s getting worse, not better with fewer than 50 kids in K. So that data alone combines with the two other “highly walkable” schools within a mile or so in each direction strongly supports the APS plan.

Undernrolled with trailers? That’s the only way you get “significantly.”

From all the kids I’m seeing around here, kids which are mysteriously missing from APS’ data, Tuckahoe and Discovery will likely be overcrowded on Day 1. Nottingham won’t be converted back until every single renovation on the books is done and a year-long redistricting is done. Kindergartners will be in HS before anything gets fixed.

Please tell me you’d sign up for overcrowding if it was for the “greater good” but not your kids. Go ahead. Show us how selfless and un-privileged you are.

I signed up for overcrowding as a member of McKinley when we were under renovations and you guys just COULD NOT manage to take on extra planning units. McKinley took them even though we were still having trailers and renovations didn't finish in time so as a PP said we were at approximately 125%. We took them because Nottingham put up a fight -- it was just going to be too hard for you all -- and you said you could not. (Just like you are saying now -- it's going to just be too hard!!) So please don't lecture me about how I wouldn't do something if it benefited the greater good. I would and I have.

Suck it up and deal like everyone else around you does. Tuckahoe and Taylor etc are great schools with great supports.

Hasn’t this version of events already been debunked upthread?

Nottingham contested that anyone directly pre-zoned from Nottingham was rezoned to McKinley (which was not "debunked" btw, was just protested by someone, and affirmed by someone who knew a Nottingham family who went to McKinley, so *shrug*). NOBODY has contested that McKinley took several planning units that were supposed to be rezoned to Nottingham but Nottingham made a fuss about how it would overcrowd them so instead those PUs went to McKinley's non-finished-building-in-the-middle-of-renovations, classes in trailers, and playground time in the parking lot. When the McKinley renovations finally did open the school was over capacity and kept the trailers for quite a while afterwards.

So when Nottingham complains about how they will be inconvenienced by having their kids walk to another nearby school that is also currently significantly under capacity, or bused to Jamestown which is also really under capacity, I can only hear the tiniest of violins playing for you all. You made this bed for yourselves by working yourselves up into a frenzy with the APE folks about covid closures and sending your kids to private, and being jerks to your neighboring schools over and over and over again. Now your school is underutilized when space is at a premium. Suck it up and deal.

not true

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This “highly walkable neighborhood school” has been significantly underenrolled for years. And it’s getting worse, not better with fewer than 50 kids in K. So that data alone combines with the two other “highly walkable” schools within a mile or so in each direction strongly supports the APS plan.

Undernrolled with trailers? That’s the only way you get “significantly.”

From all the kids I’m seeing around here, kids which are mysteriously missing from APS’ data, Tuckahoe and Discovery will likely be overcrowded on Day 1. Nottingham won’t be converted back until every single renovation on the books is done and a year-long redistricting is done. Kindergartners will be in HS before anything gets fixed.

Please tell me you’d sign up for overcrowding if it was for the “greater good” but not your kids. Go ahead. Show us how selfless and un-privileged you are.

I signed up for overcrowding as a member of McKinley when we were under renovations and you guys just COULD NOT manage to take on extra planning units. McKinley took them even though we were still having trailers and renovations didn't finish in time so as a PP said we were at approximately 125%. We took them because Nottingham put up a fight -- it was just going to be too hard for you all -- and you said you could not. (Just like you are saying now -- it's going to just be too hard!!) So please don't lecture me about how I wouldn't do something if it benefited the greater good. I would and I have.

Suck it up and deal like everyone else around you does. Tuckahoe and Taylor etc are great schools with great supports.

Planning units from Tuckahoe were moved to both Nottingham and McKinley. McKinley was getting a big new addition and Nottingham was not. So it made sense for McK to get more Tuckahoe kids than Nottingham as the school with more capacity. Nottingham parents are not to blame because APS didn't finish your renovations on time. Please. You need to complain about that to APS. But you won't. You have some irrational vendetta against Nottingham.

No. The numbers showed McK would be overcrowded and Nottingham could absorb the numbers, but the pushback was too aggressive. The planners caved and it was a mistake. I watched friend who should have been moved to Nottingham from Tuckahoe move to McK. They met new friends, but it was crazy that they were moved from one overcrowded school to another. In the end, they were kind of glad b/c Nottingham made them feel quite unwelcome.

Well I think we identified the McK who pushed for McK not to get the planning units back then and is still bitter about that. So McK didn't want this planning unit and neither did Nottingham, how exactly does that make Nott the bad guys? There were two planning units under discussion that could go to either McK or Nott, APS sent 1 to McK and 1 to Nott. Sorry you are so unhappy with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I can understand the complaints from Nottingham parents. I just think the needs of other students in buildings that need renovation are greater.

+1 This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This “highly walkable neighborhood school” has been significantly underenrolled for years. And it’s getting worse, not better with fewer than 50 kids in K. So that data alone combines with the two other “highly walkable” schools within a mile or so in each direction strongly supports the APS plan.

Undernrolled with trailers? That’s the only way you get “significantly.”

From all the kids I’m seeing around here, kids which are mysteriously missing from APS’ data, Tuckahoe and Discovery will likely be overcrowded on Day 1. Nottingham won’t be converted back until every single renovation on the books is done and a year-long redistricting is done. Kindergartners will be in HS before anything gets fixed.

Please tell me you’d sign up for overcrowding if it was for the “greater good” but not your kids. Go ahead. Show us how selfless and un-privileged you are.

I signed up for overcrowding as a member of McKinley when we were under renovations and you guys just COULD NOT manage to take on extra planning units. McKinley took them even though we were still having trailers and renovations didn't finish in time so as a PP said we were at approximately 125%. We took them because Nottingham put up a fight -- it was just going to be too hard for you all -- and you said you could not. (Just like you are saying now -- it's going to just be too hard!!) So please don't lecture me about how I wouldn't do something if it benefited the greater good. I would and I have.

Suck it up and deal like everyone else around you does. Tuckahoe and Taylor etc are great schools with great supports.

Planning units from Tuckahoe were moved to both Nottingham and McKinley. McKinley was getting a big new addition and Nottingham was not. So it made sense for McK to get more Tuckahoe kids than Nottingham as the school with more capacity. Nottingham parents are not to blame because APS didn't finish your renovations on time. Please. You need to complain about that to APS. But you won't. You have some irrational vendetta against Nottingham.

No. The numbers showed McK would be overcrowded and Nottingham could absorb the numbers, but the pushback was too aggressive. The planners caved and it was a mistake. I watched friend who should have been moved to Nottingham from Tuckahoe move to McK. They met new friends, but it was crazy that they were moved from one overcrowded school to another. In the end, they were kind of glad b/c Nottingham made them feel quite unwelcome.

God these APS staff/defenders kill me. It’s always the same thing. APS staff had the correct plan but then those loud mouthed bungling North Arlington parents somehow messed up their great plan. And that’s the reason things are all screwed up now with loads of seats in NA.

I am so sick of this. Ultimately, parents do not work for APS and APS IS ACTUALLY ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS OWN POOR PLANNING.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This “highly walkable neighborhood school” has been significantly underenrolled for years. And it’s getting worse, not better with fewer than 50 kids in K. So that data alone combines with the two other “highly walkable” schools within a mile or so in each direction strongly supports the APS plan.

Undernrolled with trailers? That’s the only way you get “significantly.”

From all the kids I’m seeing around here, kids which are mysteriously missing from APS’ data, Tuckahoe and Discovery will likely be overcrowded on Day 1. Nottingham won’t be converted back until every single renovation on the books is done and a year-long redistricting is done. Kindergartners will be in HS before anything gets fixed.

Please tell me you’d sign up for overcrowding if it was for the “greater good” but not your kids. Go ahead. Show us how selfless and un-privileged you are.

I signed up for overcrowding as a member of McKinley when we were under renovations and you guys just COULD NOT manage to take on extra planning units. McKinley took them even though we were still having trailers and renovations didn't finish in time so as a PP said we were at approximately 125%. We took them because Nottingham put up a fight -- it was just going to be too hard for you all -- and you said you could not. (Just like you are saying now -- it's going to just be too hard!!) So please don't lecture me about how I wouldn't do something if it benefited the greater good. I would and I have.

Suck it up and deal like everyone else around you does. Tuckahoe and Taylor etc are great schools with great supports.

Hasn’t this version of events already been debunked upthread?

Nottingham contested that anyone directly pre-zoned from Nottingham was rezoned to McKinley (which was not "debunked" btw, was just protested by someone, and affirmed by someone who knew a Nottingham family who went to McKinley, so *shrug*). NOBODY has contested that McKinley took several planning units that were supposed to be rezoned to Nottingham but Nottingham made a fuss about how it would overcrowd them so instead those PUs went to McKinley's non-finished-building-in-the-middle-of-renovations, classes in trailers, and playground time in the parking lot. When the McKinley renovations finally did open the school was over capacity and kept the trailers for quite a while afterwards.

So when Nottingham complains about how they will be inconvenienced by having their kids walk to another nearby school that is also currently significantly under capacity, or bused to Jamestown which is also really under capacity, I can only hear the tiniest of violins playing for you all. You made this bed for yourselves by working yourselves up into a frenzy with the APE folks about covid closures and sending your kids to private, and being jerks to your neighboring schools over and over and over again. Now your school is underutilized when space is at a premium. Suck it up and deal.

Man, you have a warped sense of entitlement.

I'm not the one saying that I'm entitled to keep my neighborhood school running for fewer than 400 kids when it will fit 530, nearby schools have space and are walkable, and the county needs a building just like my school to put other kids in during renovations, but go off.

530? What’s the source for that number? It’s not what I saw