APS Closing Nottingham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What is the slide at Discovery and what was the controversy?

There's a curvy slide from the 2nd floor to the main floor. An unnecessary design feature.
The "controversy" has been about APS prioritizing fancy designs (bells and whistles) over cost efficiency. Arlington likes architectural design awards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nottingham trying to make this a Discovery problem in the other thread. Good luck.

Discovery parents aint gonna be happy when they are forced out of their palace to make room for the notties.

Enjoy the slide over at Taylor!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What is the slide at Discovery and what was the controversy?

There's a curvy slide from the 2nd floor to the main floor. An unnecessary design feature.
The "controversy" has been about APS prioritizing fancy designs (bells and whistles) over cost efficiency. Arlington likes architectural design awards.

Cardinal has one too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To update, They have put in 4 way stops in those places where people were tragically hit, though if they were there in the 1st place, it wouldn’t have happened

Nottingham doesn’t want to talk about the two different 4-way stops that have been added within 2 blocks in either direction of the school. Not consistent with their narrative that MORE PEOPLE WILL DIE if Nottingham doesn’t keep its ridiculously underenrolled school jus the way it is now.

Ok great! Now the neighborhood is safer based on CURRENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS. A swing space upends every thing we know already about traffic in the area. It is a huge fundamental change to neighborhood traffic going from a school that is overwhelmingly walkable to 100 pct driving.

I’m sorry you can’t understand that.

You do realize you're then making the case that NO pLACE can be swing space, right? You Notties certainly can't go advocating for somewhere else to take the fall. In fact, you're saying the whole idea is just too dangerous. So, no accelerated renos anywhere, right?

No, it’s a lack of a traffic study to see if/what can be done to make the streets safer. Some streets and neighborhoods are inherently safer than others based on factors outside of the control of APS. Width? Sidewalks? Stop signs? Hills?

On that basis, I think your neighborhood around NES is far more suitable than most others - esp in central/south arlington - since you have far more space and far less traffic and far less density of people.

Agreed. I think some of these NES parents have never witnessed the buzz of cars, buses, and general humanity at an elementary school drop off/pickup south of 50.

Thank you for making our point for us! We don’t want that nor can Nottingham accommodate that.

But what’s the issue with APS taking a breath and actually studying the issue? The whole argument is APS is moving too fast without supporting data and study. Making decisions like this is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Honey, you’re missing the point. The “buzz of cars, busses, and general humanity” is an acceptable state of being during school drop off/pick up.

You don’t want that? Doesn’t matter. Move to the country or go private.

And if we lose a few kids or other pedestrians in the meantime, no problem! Cost of doing business!

Please stop this. People all over the county are concerned about the safety of their kids.

Exactly, that’s the point. This isn’t NA v SA. We all want our kids to be safe. That’s why we all should want a traffic study.

PP wants NA to feel the pain the way they say SA does. What if we just demanded that it be better and safer for all of us, rather than demonizing each other?

Nice thought. So were you out demanding and advocating on behalf of other schools, especially SA schools all these years. Or just now that NES is the victim?

Where was SA back when NA schools were ridiculously overcrowded? I don't recall help from SA at all.

It goes both ways.

I believe we did nothing to stand in the way of building Discovery. Or Cardinal. Or Hamm. Though many of us, like many across the County, objected to the costs and over-the-top design of The Heights and similar things.

And where was NA in regards to the Career Center site redevelopment? From what I can tell: absent, objecting to the entire project due to cost, and/or making sure it doesn't involve a new neighborhood high school there because neighborhoods north of 50 don't want to be moved away from WL.

So not stopping something is now your version of supporting it? That's rich. But even you admit you opposed the Heights and whatever you mean by "similar things."

For the record, I live in NA and I supported the CC redevelopment.

I recall a vocal contingent in SA who opposed using the CC site as a neighborhood high school.

As a comprehensive neighborhood high school if it didn't have a pool. And that was a minority voice. Ultimately, the whole thing was paused due to cost - not to division over a pool. Then they revised the plan and it's even more inefficient financially.

Not the point of this thread, but for the record, the neighborhoods around the CC were happy to have site be a 4th HS. What they did insist on was that if APS did that, they make it a full 4th HS. Pool is just a part of that (though, FWIW, all the other comprehensive schools do have pools and APS has swimming in the HS PE curriculum), but it was also about music spaces, adequate gym spaces, etc. So, basically, if you make it a zoned school, give the kids there the same things they get at every other zoned HS in Arlington.

APS would not commit to that, nor would they say if they were going to draw a boundary around the school or not, so that's what the objection was about. And yes, ultimately they have an even more $$ and stupider plan now that still does not have these things, but at least they said they are not zoning kids there, so the neighbors dropped their complaints.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To update, They have put in 4 way stops in those places where people were tragically hit, though if they were there in the 1st place, it wouldn’t have happened

Nottingham doesn’t want to talk about the two different 4-way stops that have been added within 2 blocks in either direction of the school. Not consistent with their narrative that MORE PEOPLE WILL DIE if Nottingham doesn’t keep its ridiculously underenrolled school jus the way it is now.

Ok great! Now the neighborhood is safer based on CURRENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS. A swing space upends every thing we know already about traffic in the area. It is a huge fundamental change to neighborhood traffic going from a school that is overwhelmingly walkable to 100 pct driving.

I’m sorry you can’t understand that.

You do realize you're then making the case that NO pLACE can be swing space, right? You Notties certainly can't go advocating for somewhere else to take the fall. In fact, you're saying the whole idea is just too dangerous. So, no accelerated renos anywhere, right?

No, it’s a lack of a traffic study to see if/what can be done to make the streets safer. Some streets and neighborhoods are inherently safer than others based on factors outside of the control of APS. Width? Sidewalks? Stop signs? Hills?

On that basis, I think your neighborhood around NES is far more suitable than most others - esp in central/south arlington - since you have far more space and far less traffic and far less density of people.

Agreed. I think some of these NES parents have never witnessed the buzz of cars, buses, and general humanity at an elementary school drop off/pickup south of 50.

Thank you for making our point for us! We don’t want that nor can Nottingham accommodate that.

But what’s the issue with APS taking a breath and actually studying the issue? The whole argument is APS is moving too fast without supporting data and study. Making decisions like this is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Honey, you’re missing the point. The “buzz of cars, busses, and general humanity” is an acceptable state of being during school drop off/pick up.

You don’t want that? Doesn’t matter. Move to the country or go private.

And if we lose a few kids or other pedestrians in the meantime, no problem! Cost of doing business!

Please stop this. People all over the county are concerned about the safety of their kids.

Exactly, that’s the point. This isn’t NA v SA. We all want our kids to be safe. That’s why we all should want a traffic study.

PP wants NA to feel the pain the way they say SA does. What if we just demanded that it be better and safer for all of us, rather than demonizing each other?

Nice thought. So were you out demanding and advocating on behalf of other schools, especially SA schools all these years. Or just now that NES is the victim?

Where was SA back when NA schools were ridiculously overcrowded? I don't recall help from SA at all.

It goes both ways.

I believe we did nothing to stand in the way of building Discovery. Or Cardinal. Or Hamm. Though many of us, like many across the County, objected to the costs and over-the-top design of The Heights and similar things.

And where was NA in regards to the Career Center site redevelopment? From what I can tell: absent, objecting to the entire project due to cost, and/or making sure it doesn't involve a new neighborhood high school there because neighborhoods north of 50 don't want to be moved away from WL.

So not stopping something is now your version of supporting it? That's rich. But even you admit you opposed the Heights and whatever you mean by "similar things."

For the record, I live in NA and I supported the CC redevelopment.

I recall a vocal contingent in SA who opposed using the CC site as a neighborhood high school.

As a comprehensive neighborhood high school if it didn't have a pool. And that was a minority voice. Ultimately, the whole thing was paused due to cost - not to division over a pool. Then they revised the plan and it's even more inefficient financially.

Not the point of this thread, but for the record, the neighborhoods around the CC were happy to have site be a 4th HS. What they did insist on was that if APS did that, they make it a full 4th HS. Pool is just a part of that (though, FWIW, all the other comprehensive schools do have pools and APS has swimming in the HS PE curriculum), but it was also about music spaces, adequate gym spaces, etc. So, basically, if you make it a zoned school, give the kids there the same things they get at every other zoned HS in Arlington.

APS would not commit to that, nor would they say if they were going to draw a boundary around the school or not, so that's what the objection was about. And yes, ultimately they have an even more $$ and stupider plan now that still does not have these things, but at least they said they are not zoning kids there, so the neighbors dropped their complaints.

Fairfax high schools don't have pools. My kids were in Arlington public schools for 10 years total, and neither of them ever went to the pool for PE.
I did use the pools and could see the PE lessons. The kids were not learning to swim. The non-swimmers walked around in the baby pool. There were games of water polo with non swimmers wearing water jogging flotation belts. The Overlee and Donaldson Run swim club kids showed off their butterfly skills and didn't need to have swim lessons. A fair percentage of kids sat on the bleachers not swimming.

It looked to be a complete waste of time.

Meanwhile until Long Bridge opened, the community had only short swimming hours at these pools, being forced out of the pool and changing rooms by these "swimming lessons". Fairfax has Providence, Spring Valley Rec Centers etc open to the public all the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To update, They have put in 4 way stops in those places where people were tragically hit, though if they were there in the 1st place, it wouldn’t have happened

Nottingham doesn’t want to talk about the two different 4-way stops that have been added within 2 blocks in either direction of the school. Not consistent with their narrative that MORE PEOPLE WILL DIE if Nottingham doesn’t keep its ridiculously underenrolled school jus the way it is now.

Ok great! Now the neighborhood is safer based on CURRENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS. A swing space upends every thing we know already about traffic in the area. It is a huge fundamental change to neighborhood traffic going from a school that is overwhelmingly walkable to 100 pct driving.

I’m sorry you can’t understand that.

You do realize you're then making the case that NO pLACE can be swing space, right? You Notties certainly can't go advocating for somewhere else to take the fall. In fact, you're saying the whole idea is just too dangerous. So, no accelerated renos anywhere, right?

No, it’s a lack of a traffic study to see if/what can be done to make the streets safer. Some streets and neighborhoods are inherently safer than others based on factors outside of the control of APS. Width? Sidewalks? Stop signs? Hills?

On that basis, I think your neighborhood around NES is far more suitable than most others - esp in central/south arlington - since you have far more space and far less traffic and far less density of people.

Agreed. I think some of these NES parents have never witnessed the buzz of cars, buses, and general humanity at an elementary school drop off/pickup south of 50.

Thank you for making our point for us! We don’t want that nor can Nottingham accommodate that.

But what’s the issue with APS taking a breath and actually studying the issue? The whole argument is APS is moving too fast without supporting data and study. Making decisions like this is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Honey, you’re missing the point. The “buzz of cars, busses, and general humanity” is an acceptable state of being during school drop off/pick up.

You don’t want that? Doesn’t matter. Move to the country or go private.

And if we lose a few kids or other pedestrians in the meantime, no problem! Cost of doing business!

Please stop this. People all over the county are concerned about the safety of their kids.

Exactly, that’s the point. This isn’t NA v SA. We all want our kids to be safe. That’s why we all should want a traffic study.

PP wants NA to feel the pain the way they say SA does. What if we just demanded that it be better and safer for all of us, rather than demonizing each other?

Nice thought. So were you out demanding and advocating on behalf of other schools, especially SA schools all these years. Or just now that NES is the victim?

Where was SA back when NA schools were ridiculously overcrowded? I don't recall help from SA at all.

It goes both ways.

I believe we did nothing to stand in the way of building Discovery. Or Cardinal. Or Hamm. Though many of us, like many across the County, objected to the costs and over-the-top design of The Heights and similar things.

And where was NA in regards to the Career Center site redevelopment? From what I can tell: absent, objecting to the entire project due to cost, and/or making sure it doesn't involve a new neighborhood high school there because neighborhoods north of 50 don't want to be moved away from WL.

So not stopping something is now your version of supporting it? That's rich. But even you admit you opposed the Heights and whatever you mean by "similar things."

For the record, I live in NA and I supported the CC redevelopment.

I recall a vocal contingent in SA who opposed using the CC site as a neighborhood high school.

As a comprehensive neighborhood high school if it didn't have a pool. And that was a minority voice. Ultimately, the whole thing was paused due to cost - not to division over a pool. Then they revised the plan and it's even more inefficient financially.

Not the point of this thread, but for the record, the neighborhoods around the CC were happy to have site be a 4th HS. What they did insist on was that if APS did that, they make it a full 4th HS. Pool is just a part of that (though, FWIW, all the other comprehensive schools do have pools and APS has swimming in the HS PE curriculum), but it was also about music spaces, adequate gym spaces, etc. So, basically, if you make it a zoned school, give the kids there the same things they get at every other zoned HS in Arlington.

APS would not commit to that, nor would they say if they were going to draw a boundary around the school or not, so that's what the objection was about. And yes, ultimately they have an even more $$ and stupider plan now that still does not have these things, but at least they said they are not zoning kids there, so the neighbors dropped their complaints.

Fairfax high schools don't have pools. My kids were in Arlington public schools for 10 years total, and neither of them ever went to the pool for PE.
I did use the pools and could see the PE lessons. The kids were not learning to swim. The non-swimmers walked around in the baby pool. There were games of water polo with non swimmers wearing water jogging flotation belts. The Overlee and Donaldson Run swim club kids showed off their butterfly skills and didn't need to have swim lessons. A fair percentage of kids sat on the bleachers not swimming.

It looked to be a complete waste of time.

Meanwhile until Long Bridge opened, the community had only short swimming hours at these pools, being forced out of the pool and changing rooms by these "swimming lessons". Fairfax has Providence, Spring Valley Rec Centers etc open to the public all the time.

Don't see your point. Just that the PE swim curriculum is worthless? If you're saying Arlington schools don't need pools, you need to keep in mind that Arlington County doesn't have any pools like all the ones you cite in Fairfax Co. It's a different system. I think it makes a lot of sense to put the public pools in the high schools in such a small County - since the community center don't have them. Now, the curriculum is a separate topic to debate. I don't think a hs at the CC has to have a pool and could figure out a way to use Long Bridge which isn't tremendously far, though not tremendously straightforward to get to. If the time in the pool is insufficient, they can work out other ways to get the required time in. But a pool should never have been a show-stopper. I do agree, however, with the previous poster pointing out that there were other issues than just a pool for a neighborhood "comprehensive" high school. Doesn't mean they shouldn't have proceeded with the redevelopment, however.

[Anonymous]

The site could not have a lot of facilities that the other neighborhood HS have, like a stadium, without moving everything else offsite, which was not on the table. There was also the issue of staff parking for a full size HS. That was never going to happen, so it makes sense to me to make it a smaller option school, with fewer staff, and also that way you know as a student what the trade-offs are when selecting that school rather than being forced by where your family lives to attend a school without access to the same facilities/sports/activities as all the other HS. It’s not about a pool. Also, this wouldn’t have been my neighborhood school, but I agree with those who pushed back from making it one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To update, They have put in 4 way stops in those places where people were tragically hit, though if they were there in the 1st place, it wouldn’t have happened

Nottingham doesn’t want to talk about the two different 4-way stops that have been added within 2 blocks in either direction of the school. Not consistent with their narrative that MORE PEOPLE WILL DIE if Nottingham doesn’t keep its ridiculously underenrolled school jus the way it is now.

Ok great! Now the neighborhood is safer based on CURRENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS. A swing space upends every thing we know already about traffic in the area. It is a huge fundamental change to neighborhood traffic going from a school that is overwhelmingly walkable to 100 pct driving.

I’m sorry you can’t understand that.

You do realize you're then making the case that NO pLACE can be swing space, right? You Notties certainly can't go advocating for somewhere else to take the fall. In fact, you're saying the whole idea is just too dangerous. So, no accelerated renos anywhere, right?

No, it’s a lack of a traffic study to see if/what can be done to make the streets safer. Some streets and neighborhoods are inherently safer than others based on factors outside of the control of APS. Width? Sidewalks? Stop signs? Hills?

On that basis, I think your neighborhood around NES is far more suitable than most others - esp in central/south arlington - since you have far more space and far less traffic and far less density of people.

Agreed. I think some of these NES parents have never witnessed the buzz of cars, buses, and general humanity at an elementary school drop off/pickup south of 50.

Thank you for making our point for us! We don’t want that nor can Nottingham accommodate that.

But what’s the issue with APS taking a breath and actually studying the issue? The whole argument is APS is moving too fast without supporting data and study. Making decisions like this is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Honey, you’re missing the point. The “buzz of cars, busses, and general humanity” is an acceptable state of being during school drop off/pick up.

You don’t want that? Doesn’t matter. Move to the country or go private.

And if we lose a few kids or other pedestrians in the meantime, no problem! Cost of doing business!

Please stop this. People all over the county are concerned about the safety of their kids.

Exactly, that’s the point. This isn’t NA v SA. We all want our kids to be safe. That’s why we all should want a traffic study.

PP wants NA to feel the pain the way they say SA does. What if we just demanded that it be better and safer for all of us, rather than demonizing each other?

Nice thought. So were you out demanding and advocating on behalf of other schools, especially SA schools all these years. Or just now that NES is the victim?

Where was SA back when NA schools were ridiculously overcrowded? I don't recall help from SA at all.

It goes both ways.

I believe we did nothing to stand in the way of building Discovery. Or Cardinal. Or Hamm. Though many of us, like many across the County, objected to the costs and over-the-top design of The Heights and similar things.

And where was NA in regards to the Career Center site redevelopment? From what I can tell: absent, objecting to the entire project due to cost, and/or making sure it doesn't involve a new neighborhood high school there because neighborhoods north of 50 don't want to be moved away from WL.

So not stopping something is now your version of supporting it? That's rich. But even you admit you opposed the Heights and whatever you mean by "similar things."

For the record, I live in NA and I supported the CC redevelopment.

I recall a vocal contingent in SA who opposed using the CC site as a neighborhood high school.

As a comprehensive neighborhood high school if it didn't have a pool. And that was a minority voice. Ultimately, the whole thing was paused due to cost - not to division over a pool. Then they revised the plan and it's even more inefficient financially.

Not the point of this thread, but for the record, the neighborhoods around the CC were happy to have site be a 4th HS. What they did insist on was that if APS did that, they make it a full 4th HS. Pool is just a part of that (though, FWIW, all the other comprehensive schools do have pools and APS has swimming in the HS PE curriculum), but it was also about music spaces, adequate gym spaces, etc. So, basically, if you make it a zoned school, give the kids there the same things they get at every other zoned HS in Arlington.

APS would not commit to that, nor would they say if they were going to draw a boundary around the school or not, so that's what the objection was about. And yes, ultimately they have an even more $$ and stupider plan now that still does not have these things, but at least they said they are not zoning kids there, so the neighbors dropped their complaints.

Fairfax high schools don't have pools. My kids were in Arlington public schools for 10 years total, and neither of them ever went to the pool for PE.
I did use the pools and could see the PE lessons. The kids were not learning to swim. The non-swimmers walked around in the baby pool. There were games of water polo with non swimmers wearing water jogging flotation belts. The Overlee and Donaldson Run swim club kids showed off their butterfly skills and didn't need to have swim lessons. A fair percentage of kids sat on the bleachers not swimming.

It looked to be a complete waste of time.

Meanwhile until Long Bridge opened, the community had only short swimming hours at these pools, being forced out of the pool and changing rooms by these "swimming lessons". Fairfax has Providence, Spring Valley Rec Centers etc open to the public all the time.

When was this?

Swimming was part of PE in ES.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To update, They have put in 4 way stops in those places where people were tragically hit, though if they were there in the 1st place, it wouldn’t have happened

Nottingham doesn’t want to talk about the two different 4-way stops that have been added within 2 blocks in either direction of the school. Not consistent with their narrative that MORE PEOPLE WILL DIE if Nottingham doesn’t keep its ridiculously underenrolled school jus the way it is now.

Ok great! Now the neighborhood is safer based on CURRENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS. A swing space upends every thing we know already about traffic in the area. It is a huge fundamental change to neighborhood traffic going from a school that is overwhelmingly walkable to 100 pct driving.

I’m sorry you can’t understand that.

You do realize you're then making the case that NO pLACE can be swing space, right? You Notties certainly can't go advocating for somewhere else to take the fall. In fact, you're saying the whole idea is just too dangerous. So, no accelerated renos anywhere, right?

No, it’s a lack of a traffic study to see if/what can be done to make the streets safer. Some streets and neighborhoods are inherently safer than others based on factors outside of the control of APS. Width? Sidewalks? Stop signs? Hills?

On that basis, I think your neighborhood around NES is far more suitable than most others - esp in central/south arlington - since you have far more space and far less traffic and far less density of people.

Agreed. I think some of these NES parents have never witnessed the buzz of cars, buses, and general humanity at an elementary school drop off/pickup south of 50.

Thank you for making our point for us! We don’t want that nor can Nottingham accommodate that.

But what’s the issue with APS taking a breath and actually studying the issue? The whole argument is APS is moving too fast without supporting data and study. Making decisions like this is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Honey, you’re missing the point. The “buzz of cars, busses, and general humanity” is an acceptable state of being during school drop off/pick up.

You don’t want that? Doesn’t matter. Move to the country or go private.

And if we lose a few kids or other pedestrians in the meantime, no problem! Cost of doing business!

Please stop this. People all over the county are concerned about the safety of their kids.

Exactly, that’s the point. This isn’t NA v SA. We all want our kids to be safe. That’s why we all should want a traffic study.

PP wants NA to feel the pain the way they say SA does. What if we just demanded that it be better and safer for all of us, rather than demonizing each other?

Nice thought. So were you out demanding and advocating on behalf of other schools, especially SA schools all these years. Or just now that NES is the victim?

Where was SA back when NA schools were ridiculously overcrowded? I don't recall help from SA at all.

It goes both ways.

I believe we did nothing to stand in the way of building Discovery. Or Cardinal. Or Hamm. Though many of us, like many across the County, objected to the costs and over-the-top design of The Heights and similar things.

And where was NA in regards to the Career Center site redevelopment? From what I can tell: absent, objecting to the entire project due to cost, and/or making sure it doesn't involve a new neighborhood high school there because neighborhoods north of 50 don't want to be moved away from WL.

So not stopping something is now your version of supporting it? That's rich. But even you admit you opposed the Heights and whatever you mean by "similar things."

For the record, I live in NA and I supported the CC redevelopment.

I recall a vocal contingent in SA who opposed using the CC site as a neighborhood high school.

As a comprehensive neighborhood high school if it didn't have a pool. And that was a minority voice. Ultimately, the whole thing was paused due to cost - not to division over a pool. Then they revised the plan and it's even more inefficient financially.

Not the point of this thread, but for the record, the neighborhoods around the CC were happy to have site be a 4th HS. What they did insist on was that if APS did that, they make it a full 4th HS. Pool is just a part of that (though, FWIW, all the other comprehensive schools do have pools and APS has swimming in the HS PE curriculum), but it was also about music spaces, adequate gym spaces, etc. So, basically, if you make it a zoned school, give the kids there the same things they get at every other zoned HS in Arlington.

APS would not commit to that, nor would they say if they were going to draw a boundary around the school or not, so that's what the objection was about. And yes, ultimately they have an even more $$ and stupider plan now that still does not have these things, but at least they said they are not zoning kids there, so the neighbors dropped their complaints.

Fairfax high schools don't have pools. My kids were in Arlington public schools for 10 years total, and neither of them ever went to the pool for PE.
I did use the pools and could see the PE lessons. The kids were not learning to swim. The non-swimmers walked around in the baby pool. There were games of water polo with non swimmers wearing water jogging flotation belts. The Overlee and Donaldson Run swim club kids showed off their butterfly skills and didn't need to have swim lessons. A fair percentage of kids sat on the bleachers not swimming.

It looked to be a complete waste of time.

Meanwhile until Long Bridge opened, the community had only short swimming hours at these pools, being forced out of the pool and changing rooms by these "swimming lessons". Fairfax has Providence, Spring Valley Rec Centers etc open to the public all the time.

Everything about your post is useless. You are comparing apples to oranges when it comes to county facilities. FFX county is HUGE. APS HS should have pools - they are multipurpose. For the community and the school.
And sorry, you weren't paying attention if you say your kids didn't go to the pool for PE - you either opted out or missed the grades where it was part of the curriculum.

Go back to FFX; you information is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The site could not have a lot of facilities that the other neighborhood HS have, like a stadium, without moving everything else offsite, which was not on the table. There was also the issue of staff parking for a full size HS. That was never going to happen, so it makes sense to me to make it a smaller option school, with fewer staff, and also that way you know as a student what the trade-offs are when selecting that school rather than being forced by where your family lives to attend a school without access to the same facilities/sports/activities as all the other HS. It’s not about a pool. Also, this wouldn’t have been my neighborhood school, but I agree with those who pushed back from making it one.

we've gotten into a side debate now. i think we've proved the point that NA didn't opposed redevelopment at the CC site as one SA poster originally claimed. SA did. They may have had their reasons - they sure jumped to list them - but it was SA that didn't like the plans for a neighborhood HS and that whole debate delayed the project for several years.

[Anonymous]

Notties trying to get everyone in NA riled up about “massive overcrowding” on the other thread. Not supported by the numbers. Amusing!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Notties trying to get everyone in NA riled up about “massive overcrowding” on the other thread. Not supported by the numbers. Amusing!

If you buy APS’ enrollment numbers from the COVID years and their guesstimates about 2026, maybe. People are digging into the data and APS staff doesn’t like it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To update, They have put in 4 way stops in those places where people were tragically hit, though if they were there in the 1st place, it wouldn’t have happened

Nottingham doesn’t want to talk about the two different 4-way stops that have been added within 2 blocks in either direction of the school. Not consistent with their narrative that MORE PEOPLE WILL DIE if Nottingham doesn’t keep its ridiculously underenrolled school jus the way it is now.

Ok great! Now the neighborhood is safer based on CURRENT TRAFFIC PATTERNS. A swing space upends every thing we know already about traffic in the area. It is a huge fundamental change to neighborhood traffic going from a school that is overwhelmingly walkable to 100 pct driving.

I’m sorry you can’t understand that.

You do realize you're then making the case that NO pLACE can be swing space, right? You Notties certainly can't go advocating for somewhere else to take the fall. In fact, you're saying the whole idea is just too dangerous. So, no accelerated renos anywhere, right?

No, it’s a lack of a traffic study to see if/what can be done to make the streets safer. Some streets and neighborhoods are inherently safer than others based on factors outside of the control of APS. Width? Sidewalks? Stop signs? Hills?

On that basis, I think your neighborhood around NES is far more suitable than most others - esp in central/south arlington - since you have far more space and far less traffic and far less density of people.

Agreed. I think some of these NES parents have never witnessed the buzz of cars, buses, and general humanity at an elementary school drop off/pickup south of 50.

Thank you for making our point for us! We don’t want that nor can Nottingham accommodate that.

But what’s the issue with APS taking a breath and actually studying the issue? The whole argument is APS is moving too fast without supporting data and study. Making decisions like this is how we got into this mess in the first place.

Honey, you’re missing the point. The “buzz of cars, busses, and general humanity” is an acceptable state of being during school drop off/pick up.

You don’t want that? Doesn’t matter. Move to the country or go private.

And if we lose a few kids or other pedestrians in the meantime, no problem! Cost of doing business!

Please stop this. People all over the county are concerned about the safety of their kids.

Exactly, that’s the point. This isn’t NA v SA. We all want our kids to be safe. That’s why we all should want a traffic study.

PP wants NA to feel the pain the way they say SA does. What if we just demanded that it be better and safer for all of us, rather than demonizing each other?

Nice thought. So were you out demanding and advocating on behalf of other schools, especially SA schools all these years. Or just now that NES is the victim?

Where was SA back when NA schools were ridiculously overcrowded? I don't recall help from SA at all.

It goes both ways.

I believe we did nothing to stand in the way of building Discovery. Or Cardinal. Or Hamm. Though many of us, like many across the County, objected to the costs and over-the-top design of The Heights and similar things.

And where was NA in regards to the Career Center site redevelopment? From what I can tell: absent, objecting to the entire project due to cost, and/or making sure it doesn't involve a new neighborhood high school there because neighborhoods north of 50 don't want to be moved away from WL.

So not stopping something is now your version of supporting it? That's rich. But even you admit you opposed the Heights and whatever you mean by "similar things."

For the record, I live in NA and I supported the CC redevelopment.

I recall a vocal contingent in SA who opposed using the CC site as a neighborhood high school.

As a comprehensive neighborhood high school if it didn't have a pool. And that was a minority voice. Ultimately, the whole thing was paused due to cost - not to division over a pool. Then they revised the plan and it's even more inefficient financially.

Not the point of this thread, but for the record, the neighborhoods around the CC were happy to have site be a 4th HS. What they did insist on was that if APS did that, they make it a full 4th HS. Pool is just a part of that (though, FWIW, all the other comprehensive schools do have pools and APS has swimming in the HS PE curriculum), but it was also about music spaces, adequate gym spaces, etc. So, basically, if you make it a zoned school, give the kids there the same things they get at every other zoned HS in Arlington.

APS would not commit to that, nor would they say if they were going to draw a boundary around the school or not, so that's what the objection was about. And yes, ultimately they have an even more $$ and stupider plan now that still does not have these things, but at least they said they are not zoning kids there, so the neighbors dropped their complaints.

That's a bit of whitewashing the local CC resistance. There was and still remains a vocal fraction in the neighborhood totally opposed to the campus being used for choice schools because it does not directly benefit them. They have remained vocally critical through the recent county permit stage this summer. But there were also some neighborhoods who allied with them earlier but dropped their resistance as soon as APS committed to make the CC choice and not an under-facilitized neighborhood HS. BTW, let the record show the superintendent made the commitment last year.

[Anonymous]

APS students do swimming curriculum in elementary, middle, and high school. Yes, many children already know how to swim. My kids both reported swimming instruction for those who don’t.

[Anonymous]

According to Arl Now, Notties now have CCPTA singing their tune. Wonder how many South Arlington school communities agree with the CCPTA position?