APS: Elementary Walk Zone surveys out

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Are you new to this thread?

[Anonymous]

https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Better just to ignore her. She is so clueless and judgemental it’s not worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Many vocal parents don’t want urban solutions. Look at the Wilson site. Could have been great but those loud-mouthed Bs forced H-B to move there instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Are you new to this thread?

I mean, their schools will inevitably remain lily white bubbles because of privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Many vocal parents don’t want urban solutions. Look at the Wilson site. Could have been great but those loud-mouthed Bs forced H-B to move there instead.

So instead of urban options there option is nothing? Or overcrowded schools? Or yelling? I guess I am just not sure what the answer is if we aren't willing to look at urban options. I mean there are so many cool options. I was just looking at this school in Australia https://architectureau.com/articles/new-melbourne-vertical-school-unveiled/

[Anonymous]

Didn't a private school open recently in Ballston? If parents are willing to pay $26K a year to send their kid there, maybe APS will reconsider their objections to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Many vocal parents don’t want urban solutions. Look at the Wilson site. Could have been great but those loud-mouthed Bs forced H-B to move there instead.

So instead of urban options there option is nothing? Or overcrowded schools? Or yelling? I guess I am just not sure what the answer is if we aren't willing to look at urban options. I mean there are so many cool options. I was just looking at this school in Australia https://architectureau.com/articles/new-melbourne-vertical-school-unveiled/

Hah, yes high school students (who can drive or take public transit alone to community centers and public fields) vs middle school students who generally will get the bulk of their outside activity at the school esp if they are in the checkin program.

Also, your cool Australian school has HALF the students there proposed at the Wilson middle school.

That site doesn’t work for a neighborhood middle school but makes a lot of sense for HB students who are allowed to leave campus.

Now APS squandering so much money on the school, well that is just bad management.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Building a custom elementary school with field space on the roof would cost crazy amounts of money. Few of the office buildings are configured for schools, and most are too big for one school. So want your 3rd grade sharing an elevator with rando office workers?

Building vertical is VERY expensive and existing office building don’t work as schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Many vocal parents don’t want urban solutions. Look at the Wilson site. Could have been great but those loud-mouthed Bs forced H-B to move there instead.

So instead of urban options there option is nothing? Or overcrowded schools? Or yelling? I guess I am just not sure what the answer is if we aren't willing to look at urban options. I mean there are so many cool options. I was just looking at this school in Australia https://architectureau.com/articles/new-melbourne-vertical-school-unveiled/

Hah, yes high school students (who can drive or take public transit alone to community centers and public fields) vs middle school students who generally will get the bulk of their outside activity at the school esp if they are in the checkin program.

Also, your cool Australian school has HALF the students there proposed at the Wilson middle school.

That site doesn’t work for a neighborhood middle school but makes a lot of sense for HB students who are allowed to leave campus.

Now APS squandering so much money on the school, well that is just bad management.

I wasn't saying that the AU school was a perfect solution, just that it was an attractive looking design. But it just makes zero sense to me to discount these options. There are ways to get outdoor space at a vertical school. There are atriums and roof top playgrounds/sports areas. You can even built soccer fields on top of roofs. So, yes the AU school is half the kids, but you can make a bigger building...it is possible. They have these buildings in NYC that are really tall..you might have heard of them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Building a custom elementary school with field space on the roof would cost crazy amounts of money. Few of the office buildings are configured for schools, and most are too big for one school. So want your 3rd grade sharing an elevator with rando office workers?

Building vertical is VERY expensive and existing office building don’t work as schools.

I am not saying it isn't expensive, it just seems that if there is no space for no elementary schools I am not sure what else to do. It seems like a solution for when we have run out of space. Are we not at that point now? If we aren't at that point and there is vacant space in Arlington where we can build more schools please let me know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Building a custom elementary school with field space on the roof would cost crazy amounts of money. Few of the office buildings are configured for schools, and most are too big for one school. So want your 3rd grade sharing an elevator with rando office workers?

Building vertical is VERY expensive and existing office building don’t work as schools.

I am not saying it isn't expensive, it just seems that if there is no space for no elementary schools I am not sure what else to do. It seems like a solution for when we have run out of space. Are we not at that point now? If we aren't at that point and there is vacant space in Arlington where we can build more schools please let me know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Building a custom elementary school with field space on the roof would cost crazy amounts of money. Few of the office buildings are configured for schools, and most are too big for one school. So want your 3rd grade sharing an elevator with rando office workers?

Building vertical is VERY expensive and existing office building don’t work as schools.

I am not saying it isn't expensive, it just seems that if there is no space for no elementary schools I am not sure what else to do. It seems like a solution for when we have run out of space. Are we not at that point now? If we aren't at that point and there is vacant space in Arlington where we can build more schools please let me know.

There is tons of space. They're called community centers and they are completely unnecessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.arlnow.com/2018/02/26/county-board-approves-contested-ballston-development/
Oh look, more affordable housing and family units clustered right in Ballston. All to enrich developers. What school will reap the benefits of this decision? Glebe? Hey, as long as it's walkable who cares about overcrowding. Good thing the superintendent is increasing class sizes.

Isn't there a ton of empty office space in Ballston. Why is this county so against vertical schools. I realize it isn't the best, but it seems like there are a few place in this county where we could place a vertical school (Ballston and Crystal City). I mean somehow the children of NYC survive. You could create playground on the roof or/and innovated indoor play spaces with lots of access to natural light.

Anyway, I am sure this idea has been mentioned before, I am just not sure why the county seems so resistant to it. I mean elementary schools don't even need all the field spaces HS have so it seems like it would work better with ES. And you can put a green space on an ES roof or make an atrium with green space? It just seems like everyone is married to this idea traditional ES designs when we could think outside the box and get some more space for new schools

Building a custom elementary school with field space on the roof would cost crazy amounts of money. Few of the office buildings are configured for schools, and most are too big for one school. So want your 3rd grade sharing an elevator with rando office workers?

Building vertical is VERY expensive and existing office building don’t work as schools.

I am not saying it isn't expensive, it just seems that if there is no space for no elementary schools I am not sure what else to do. It seems like a solution for when we have run out of space. Are we not at that point now? If we aren't at that point and there is vacant space in Arlington where we can build more schools please let me know.

There is tons of space. They're called community centers and they are completely unnecessary.

They seem well used when I visit them, but sure.