Reed School

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure the last word is out on that. Until there's a boundary for Reed it's always possible the Board could change their mind.Are any of them really beholden to Westover other than Kanninen? I know APS staff doesn't necessarily think it makes sense as a neighborhood school.

Although it’s theoretically possible, Reed has a high percentage of potential neighborhood walkers. I don’t remember all the numbers, but one of the main reasons they targeted Nottingham and Tuckahoe as potential option sites instead of Reed was fewer buses on the road.

That's incorrect. Per staff analysis, Reed has the potential to be 60% walkers and would need 5 buses, Tuckahoe could be up to 65% walkers and would need 4 buses, Nottingham could be up to 82% walkers and would need 2 buses. Nottingham and Tuckahoe are both more walkable than Reed.

Reed will hold 750 kids, compared to Nottingham and Tuckahoe that only hold 500. So of course Reed will have more buses-- that's 250 more kids. If Reed was only being built to hold 500 kids, it would easily meet Nottingham's percentage of walkers.

Nottingham and Tuckahoe are being considered because they are so small, which makes it easier to shift those kids to larger facilities like Discovery, Reed, and McKinley when they draw new boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still don't understand why that's not going to be an option school

Because neighborhood seats are needed there.

Wrong. Neighborhood seats are *Wanted* there.

+ 1. Once they redraw the boundaries, one of the other schools is going to be the option because there are too many seats here and not enough in other areas. Might make sense from a transportation perspective, though.

Keep dreaming. Swap is going to happen, and then there's no reason to move ATS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask RG about the budget. They used 2012 figures for construction and operated under the assumption that a 2nd story could be built on the existing building. Unfortunately, the previous SB approved cost cutting measures that made that impossible. Surprise! Both CB and SB realized they didn’t plan correctly, so the budget was increased for 2018 realities.

^^ This. The Westover haters on here don't know what they are talking about. In addition to the surprise discovery that Reed wasn't built to support a 2nd story after all, APS also realized that there was a major utility line running down the middle of the property and it was unclear whether the County was willing to grant APS an easement to build over it. Of the six designs that the architects created, only one design ended up being within the original budget-- that design would have built a standalone building elsewhere on the property to hold grades 3-5. It was the APS staff on the BLPC who opposed that design the most, not the neighbors. The Reed School will continue to share the location with the Westover library, which is the 2nd busiest library in Arlington. APS staff had safety concerns with students moving back and forth between two separate school buildings all day on a property that will be fully open to the general public during school hours and directly across the street from the Westover post office and a busy retail strip. If anyone is to blame for the budget increase, it is the APS facilities office for not adequately scoping out the project before they presented a proposed budget to the school board.

Right. This is all a matter of public record. I don't know why there is a continued effort to spread misinformation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ask RG about the budget. They used 2012 figures for construction and operated under the assumption that a 2nd story could be built on the existing building. Unfortunately, the previous SB approved cost cutting measures that made that impossible. Surprise! Both CB and SB realized they didn’t plan correctly, so the budget was increased for 2018 realities.

^^ This. The Westover haters on here don't know what they are talking about. In addition to the surprise discovery that Reed wasn't built to support a 2nd story after all, APS also realized that there was a major utility line running down the middle of the property and it was unclear whether the County was willing to grant APS an easement to build over it. Of the six designs that the architects created, only one design ended up being within the original budget-- that design would have built a standalone building elsewhere on the property to hold grades 3-5. It was the APS staff on the BLPC who opposed that design the most, not the neighbors. The Reed School will continue to share the location with the Westover library, which is the 2nd busiest library in Arlington. APS staff had safety concerns with students moving back and forth between two separate school buildings all day on a property that will be fully open to the general public during school hours and directly across the street from the Westover post office and a busy retail strip. If anyone is to blame for the budget increase, it is the APS facilities office for not adequately scoping out the project before they presented a proposed budget to the school board.

Right. This is all a matter of public record. I don't know why there is a continued effort to spread misinformation.

Because the truth doesn't fit their agenda and their moral code doesn't preclude lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure the last word is out on that. Until there's a boundary for Reed it's always possible the Board could change their mind.Are any of them really beholden to Westover other than Kanninen? I know APS staff doesn't necessarily think it makes sense as a neighborhood school.

Although it’s theoretically possible, Reed has a high percentage of potential neighborhood walkers. I don’t remember all the numbers, but one of the main reasons they targeted Nottingham and Tuckahoe as potential option sites instead of Reed was fewer buses on the road.

Are you kidding? Nottingham has one of the highest percentages of walkers in the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure the last word is out on that. Until there's a boundary for Reed it's always possible the Board could change their mind.Are any of them really beholden to Westover other than Kanninen? I know APS staff doesn't necessarily think it makes sense as a neighborhood school.

Although it’s theoretically possible, Reed has a high percentage of potential neighborhood walkers. I don’t remember all the numbers, but one of the main reasons they targeted Nottingham and Tuckahoe as potential option sites instead of Reed was fewer buses on the road.

Are you kidding? Nottingham has one of the highest percentages of walkers in the county.

Remember many of those walkers overlap with other schools' walk zones as well so many of those same kids could readily walk to Tuckahoe or Reed or Discovery.

[Anonymous]

The advisory committees were comprised of educators, admin, senior staff, county employees and neighborhood reps. The group with the least representation was the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure the last word is out on that. Until there's a boundary for Reed it's always possible the Board could change their mind.Are any of them really beholden to Westover other than Kanninen? I know APS staff doesn't necessarily think it makes sense as a neighborhood school.

Although it’s theoretically possible, Reed has a high percentage of potential neighborhood walkers. I don’t remember all the numbers, but one of the main reasons they targeted Nottingham and Tuckahoe as potential option sites instead of Reed was fewer buses on the road.

Are you kidding? Nottingham has one of the highest percentages of walkers in the county.

Remember many of those walkers overlap with other schools' walk zones as well so many of those same kids could readily walk to Tuckahoe or Reed or Discovery.

Unless we start using bigger buses, bigger schools will always mean more buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids won’t be at Reed, but I look forward to it opening. McKinley has been shamefully overcrowded for years.

word

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure the last word is out on that. Until there's a boundary for Reed it's always possible the Board could change their mind.Are any of them really beholden to Westover other than Kanninen? I know APS staff doesn't necessarily think it makes sense as a neighborhood school.

Although it’s theoretically possible, Reed has a high percentage of potential neighborhood walkers. I don’t remember all the numbers, but one of the main reasons they targeted Nottingham and Tuckahoe as potential option sites instead of Reed was fewer buses on the road.

Are you kidding? Nottingham has one of the highest percentages of walkers in the county.

Remember many of those walkers overlap with other schools' walk zones as well so many of those same kids could readily walk to Tuckahoe or Reed or Discovery.

Please show me the overlapping walk zones between Nottingham and Reed.

[Anonymous]

You should see the expansive walk zone that Reed community pushed for. It is absurdly large and is going to lead to crazy car traffic. They'd be better off with an option school and buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You should see the expansive walk zone that Reed community pushed for. It is absurdly large and is going to lead to crazy car traffic. They'd be better off with an option school and buses.

Across Lee Highway?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not sure the last word is out on that. Until there's a boundary for Reed it's always possible the Board could change their mind.Are any of them really beholden to Westover other than Kanninen? I know APS staff doesn't necessarily think it makes sense as a neighborhood school.

Although it’s theoretically possible, Reed has a high percentage of potential neighborhood walkers. I don’t remember all the numbers, but one of the main reasons they targeted Nottingham and Tuckahoe as potential option sites instead of Reed was fewer buses on the road.

Are you kidding? Nottingham has one of the highest percentages of walkers in the county.

Remember many of those walkers overlap with other schools' walk zones as well so many of those same kids could readily walk to Tuckahoe or Reed or Discovery.

And the same is true the other way around - kids from Tuck or Discovery could walk to Nottingham. No matter how you slice it, Nottingham has more walkers than Tuckahoe.

Walk zones don't overlap between Reed and any of these other schools because of Lee Highway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Still don't understand why that's not going to be an option school

Because neighborhood seats are needed there.

Wrong. Neighborhood seats are *Wanted* there.

+ 1. Once they redraw the boundaries, one of the other schools is going to be the option because there are too many seats here and not enough in other areas. Might make sense from a transportation perspective, though.

Keep dreaming. Swap is going to happen, and then there's no reason to move ATS.

Swap is a delay tactic. It gets Key used to idea that they are moving and dampens Cherrydale crazy for a while.

It’s obvious they will move Immersion to Reed. You end up with two neighborhood schools in east Arlington (Amazon employees will have kids and fill those condos in Rosslyn), and Key happily moves to a brand new school on a great site, and Cherrydale gets neighborhood school.

Then they adjust boundaries to relieve overcrowding and eliminate east west long boundaries.

[Anonymous]

Immersion is going south
Duh.
Not Reed.