LAST APS meeting on new high school and countywide rezoning (4/4, 7 pm Yorktown)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The School Board has proposed it as a neighborhood school. There is a $150 million budget. Is that not enough to allow for construction of a pool, etc.?

Falls Church City proposed a 1500 seat $117M brand new high school option that also included administrative office space. We can definitely do more than just 1300 seats with $147M.

The FCC school did not include a pool for sure. Also- I'm not sure what it included for field space as compared to what they already have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The School Board has proposed it as a neighborhood school. There is a $150 million budget. Is that not enough to allow for construction of a pool, etc.?

Apparently not. Also, you can't build a full HS while the other two schools are still on the site. They have to be moved first or there isn't space for all the fields. That's my understanding.

My take from the discussion is that the ES would not be moved but the MS would in order to expand the HS into the existing building. They could build 1300 on the site now (presumably on the Kenmore parking lot) to preserve the fields. It currently has sufficient field space for a HS, although not a football stadium. But, sharing those fields between the existing MS plus an added HS would be challenging. The fields there are already heavily used between the MS, ES, and non-school sports leagues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The School Board has proposed it as a neighborhood school. There is a $150 million budget. Is that not enough to allow for construction of a pool, etc.?

Apparently not. Also, you can't build a full HS while the other two schools are still on the site. They have to be moved first or there isn't space for all the fields. That's my understanding.

My take from the discussion is that the ES would not be moved but the MS would in order to expand the HS into the existing building. They could build 1300 on the site now (presumably on the Kenmore parking lot) to preserve the fields. It currently has sufficient field space for a HS, although not a football stadium. But, sharing those fields between the existing MS plus an added HS would be challenging. The fields there are already heavily used between the MS, ES, and non-school sports leagues.

But they could figure it out. The fields at the other 3 schools could be used, as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The School Board has proposed it as a neighborhood school. There is a $150 million budget. Is that not enough to allow for construction of a pool, etc.?

Apparently not. Also, you can't build a full HS while the other two schools are still on the site. They have to be moved first or there isn't space for all the fields. That's my understanding.

My take from the discussion is that the ES would not be moved but the MS would in order to expand the HS into the existing building. They could build 1300 on the site now (presumably on the Kenmore parking lot) to preserve the fields. It currently has sufficient field space for a HS, although not a football stadium. But, sharing those fields between the existing MS plus an added HS would be challenging. The fields there are already heavily used between the MS, ES, and non-school sports leagues.

But they could figure it out. The fields at the other 3 schools could be used, as well.

I agree. With the growth in kid population and limited space field sharing is going to have to be the norm going forward, regardless of where the schools end up.

[Anonymous]

But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?

There is growth in both North and South. Gunston is not far behind Williamsburg and Swanson in overcrowding. The Kenmore site is fairly centrally coated so could serve well for either/both North and South.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?

There is growth in both North and South. Gunston is not far behind Williamsburg and Swanson in overcrowding. The Kenmore site is fairly centrally coated so could serve well for either/both North and South.

All three high schools are already overcrowded or projected to soon be.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?

They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?

They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.

SB is lazy and cheap. Gambling overcrowding is temporary demographic bump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?

They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.

ok. but it's also close to the students right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?

They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.

ok. but it's also close to the students right?

4000 kids on one campus is entirely too many. Talk about traffic! At least with Kenmore the traffic would be spread out during the day.

[Anonymous]

IB needs to move to WF before more kids is put in Ed Ctr or build a new full HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?

They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.

ok. but it's also close to the students right?

All of the high schools will be overcrowded - the most recent bond included money to do internal work at Wakefield to increase its capacity by 250 students and that school is practically brand new. Yes, WL is currently the most overcrowded but due to its boundary, many of its students live very close to Kenmore and along Carlin Springs. In any event, the SB is almost certainly going to make the new 1300 seats a choice school so it will have to draw students from across the county.

And I too think a 4,000 student high school is insane. How the hell can the SB continue to protect and keep HB tiny and on the other hand create a 4,000 student high school and tell parents and students alike that everything is will be just fine. Many parents put their kid's name in the HB lottery not because they believe in its educational philosophy but because they want to avoid the huge, overcrowded schools. Can you imagine the disparities between HB and a 4,000 seat high school? On one hand we're told some kids do better in HB's small environment but can anyone honestly say a student will do better at a 4,000 seat HS? To me, this is educational malpractice and my kid will be out of APS before this happens.

[Anonymous]

Yes a 4000 seat WL is a terrible idea, but so what? It's a problem of our own making. Everyone is squeezing in bounds for it and no one wants to be moved out. Add to that parents wanting access to metro, and here we are.
We had an opportunity to have better transit in other parts of the county and no one wanted to pay for it.
Did no one consider that it might be a good idea to draw middle class families elsewhere?
We've concentrated poverty, so we have schools that no middle class families will consider. We created an uncrossable imaginary line at route 50.
No sympathy for WL and McKinley. No one forces people to perpetuate this cycle and this is the logical consequence of our collective behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes a 4000 seat WL is a terrible idea, but so what? It's a problem of our own making. Everyone is squeezing in bounds for it and no one wants to be moved out. Add to that parents wanting access to metro, and here we are.
We had an opportunity to have better transit in other parts of the county and no one wanted to pay for it.
Did no one consider that it might be a good idea to draw middle class families elsewhere?
We've concentrated poverty, so we have schools that no middle class families will consider. We created an uncrossable imaginary line at route 50.
No sympathy for WL and McKinley. No one forces people to perpetuate this cycle and this is the logical consequence of our collective behavior.

Truth