Taylor's Feb Rec for Crown Boundary Study

[Anonymous]

I am very confused about the enrollment projections.

Here RMHS is still projected to be over enrolled.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/departments/planning/fy2027/CIP27_Chapter4_Richard-Montgomery-Cluster.pdf

But Option H has them under enrolled. Is this due to the regional programs? And if so, how can they project how many students in region 4 will pick RMHS and how many from RMHS will go elsewhere?

I'm thinking RM will remain over capacity if they don't shift some from RMHS to Crown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am very confused about the enrollment projections.

Here RMHS is still projected to be over enrolled.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/departments/planning/fy2027/CIP27_Chapter4_Richard-Montgomery-Cluster.pdf

But Option H has them under enrolled. Is this due to the regional programs? And if so, how can they project how many students in region 4 will pick RMHS and how many from RMHS will go elsewhere?

I'm thinking RM will remain over capacity if they don't shift some from RMHS to Crown.

The numbers in option H (and all other options) are only counting resident students (students who live within the boundaries in that option). The CIP is counting this year's actually enrolled students as of Sept. 30th, and then making projections going forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[twitter]

Anonymous wrote:What really *should* have happened if so many Wootton parents weren't so hellbent on getting a brand new school on the current Wootton site AND keeping their entire cluster together (totally unrealistic when it is a boundary study intended to redraw boundaries of multiple schools) is the following:

- Crown HS - populated with DuFief, Stone Mill, Travilah, Rosemont, and Fields Road, (with Fallsmead Rio island going to Crown)

- Wootton (at current location) - Fallsmead (without Rio island), Lakewood, Cold Spring, and Ritchie Park

- RM - Twinbrook, Beall, Bayard Rustin, and College Gardens

This scenario would help to alleviate the overcrowding at RM, focus on geographic proximity for filling Crown while keeping 3 of the Wootton cluster schools together at both current Wootton and Crown, and maximize walkers/minimize buses at Wootton. Right now 100% of Ritchie Park kids are bussed to RM, but at least 60% could walk to Wootton.

I know Ritchie Park wanted to stay at JW and RM, but again, that is nonsensical from a boundary study perspective as well - at least one school in the RM cluster should/should have been moved to fulfill the original plan/promise to alleviate RM overcrowding and Ritchie Park makes the most sense from a geographic, minimizing buses perspective.

There are not enough students for both Wootton and crown from the ES listed above. Churchill has to give some to make it work but Julie yang will not let that happen.

Fallsgrove is very close to Crown, but it would suck for them to split off from the RM cluster after MS.

Same for if you send HH to Wootton - they would probably split after MS.

Fallsgrove is closer to current Wootton than Crown. Most of Fallsgrove could walk to Wootton via Millenium Trail path down Wootton Pkwy. No reason to split up Ritchie Park and current middle schools could stay as is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why people keep fixating on Wootton parkway, it’s old layout, one way traffic, certainly not what modern school campus about.

And building a high capacity school in an urban, highly congested traffic area makes sense? At least Wootton is in a residential neighborhood.

Crown is also a residential neighborhood. Many students will be able to walk there.

You know this isn’t a proper comparison. Crown is basically a huge shopping center that has some apartments and townhouses-No normal person would describe it as a residential neighborhood. The neighborhoods adjacent to Wootton aren’t also adjacent to Harris Teeter etc…

You've been to Crown right? It's like Kentlands / Lakelands.

The Crown Farm shopping center is on one end; the school is on the other end. Between them is half a mile of dense housing (townhouses, single family houses) with no shopping. It is very residential.

Since when is it called Crown Farm?

Since 1894ish... https://www.gaithersburghistory.com/photos12

Ok but it’s 2026. And it’s no longer a farm so we don’t call it that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why people keep fixating on Wootton parkway, it’s old layout, one way traffic, certainly not what modern school campus about.

And building a high capacity school in an urban, highly congested traffic area makes sense? At least Wootton is in a residential neighborhood.

Crown is also a residential neighborhood. Many students will be able to walk there.

You know this isn’t a proper comparison. Crown is basically a huge shopping center that has some apartments and townhouses-No normal person would describe it as a residential neighborhood. The neighborhoods adjacent to Wootton aren’t also adjacent to Harris Teeter etc…

You've been to Crown right? It's like Kentlands / Lakelands.

The Crown Farm shopping center is on one end; the school is on the other end. Between them is half a mile of dense housing (townhouses, single family houses) with no shopping. It is very residential.

Since when is it called Crown Farm?

Since 1894ish... https://www.gaithersburghistory.com/photos12

Ok but it’s 2026. And it’s no longer a farm so we don’t call it that.

Whoops someone tell MCPS cause they're calling it the Crown Farm site https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MFJYw8Re7KUf8iX3VFBxA8MYS1ovIOIv/view

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why people keep fixating on Wootton parkway, it’s old layout, one way traffic, certainly not what modern school campus about.

And building a high capacity school in an urban, highly congested traffic area makes sense? At least Wootton is in a residential neighborhood.

Crown is also a residential neighborhood. Many students will be able to walk there.

You know this isn’t a proper comparison. Crown is basically a huge shopping center that has some apartments and townhouses-No normal person would describe it as a residential neighborhood. The neighborhoods adjacent to Wootton aren’t also adjacent to Harris Teeter etc…

You've been to Crown right? It's like Kentlands / Lakelands.

The Crown Farm shopping center is on one end; the school is on the other end. Between them is half a mile of dense housing (townhouses, single family houses) with no shopping. It is very residential.

Since when is it called Crown Farm?

Since 1894ish... https://www.gaithersburghistory.com/photos12

Ok but it’s 2026. And it’s no longer a farm so we don’t call it that.

Whoops someone tell MCPS cause they're calling it the Crown Farm site https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MFJYw8Re7KUf8iX3VFBxA8MYS1ovIOIv/view

They called it that one time. They have not called it that before or after. But it doesn’t matter. It’s just dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What really *should* have happened if so many Wootton parents weren't so hellbent on getting a brand new school on the current Wootton site AND keeping their entire cluster together (totally unrealistic when it is a boundary study intended to redraw boundaries of multiple schools) is the following:

- Crown HS - populated with DuFief, Stone Mill, Travilah, Rosemont, and Fields Road, (with Fallsmead Rio island going to Crown)

- Wootton (at current location) - Fallsmead (without Rio island), Lakewood, Cold Spring, and Ritchie Park

- RM - Twinbrook, Beall, Bayard Rustin, and College Gardens

This scenario would help to alleviate the overcrowding at RM, focus on geographic proximity for filling Crown while keeping 3 of the Wootton cluster schools together at both current Wootton and Crown, and maximize walkers/minimize buses at Wootton. Right now 100% of Ritchie Park kids are bussed to RM, but at least 60% could walk to Wootton.

I know Ritchie Park wanted to stay at JW and RM, but again, that is nonsensical from a boundary study perspective as well - at least one school in the RM cluster should/should have been moved to fulfill the original plan/promise to alleviate RM overcrowding and Ritchie Park makes the most sense from a geographic, minimizing buses perspective.

This. Definitely this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Different poster, but this is how the numbers would look based off of 2024-2025 enrollment numbers:

Dufief 276, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 372, Rosemont 564, Fields Road 453=2181 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 2181/2219=98.3 pct

Fallsmead 512, Lakewood 406, Cold Spring 362, Ritchie Park 342=1622 Capacity: 1936 Utilization 1622/1936= 83.8 pct

Twinbrook 459, Beall 475, College Gardens 506, Bayard Rustin 757=2197 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 2197/2220=98.96 pct

The above keeps Rio island with Fallsmead and keeps all of Rosemont together, mainly because don't know the actual numbers for the subsets that are in the immediate Crown/Rio area.

But there can be some additional balancing of the schools, including other surrounding schools to balance it out more. But the other poster doesn't appear to be that far off in that possibility based on enrollment/capacity.

How long did it take for you to look up these numbers? If MCPS paid you $100 an hour, they could have saved millions paying for all of these boundary studies.

[Anonymous]

Why are the MCPS enrollment projections historically so bad. Wouldn't counting the number of K-3 students at each feeder school give a reasonable estimate of high school enrollment in 10 years? Then just add in some extra where new developments are planned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Different poster, but this is how the numbers would look based off of 2024-2025 enrollment numbers:

Dufief 276, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 372, Rosemont 564, Fields Road 453=2181 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 2181/2219=98.3 pct

Fallsmead 512, Lakewood 406, Cold Spring 362, Ritchie Park 342=1622 Capacity: 1936 Utilization 1622/1936= 83.8 pct

Twinbrook 459, Beall 475, College Gardens 506, Bayard Rustin 757=2197 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 2197/2220=98.96 pct

The above keeps Rio island with Fallsmead and keeps all of Rosemont together, mainly because don't know the actual numbers for the subsets that are in the immediate Crown/Rio area.

But there can be some additional balancing of the schools, including other surrounding schools to balance it out more. But the other poster doesn't appear to be that far off in that possibility based on enrollment/capacity.

Are these numbers representing the entire school or the four grades that would attend a high school at a given time?

How long did it take for you to look up these numbers? If MCPS paid you $100 an hour, they could have saved millions paying for all of these boundary studies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Different poster, but this is how the numbers would look based off of 2024-2025 enrollment numbers:

Dufief 276, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 372, Rosemont 564, Fields Road 453=2181 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 2181/2219=98.3 pct

Fallsmead 512, Lakewood 406, Cold Spring 362, Ritchie Park 342=1622 Capacity: 1936 Utilization 1622/1936= 83.8 pct

Twinbrook 459, Beall 475, College Gardens 506, Bayard Rustin 757=2197 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 2197/2220=98.96 pct

The above keeps Rio island with Fallsmead and keeps all of Rosemont together, mainly because don't know the actual numbers for the subsets that are in the immediate Crown/Rio area.

But there can be some additional balancing of the schools, including other surrounding schools to balance it out more. But the other poster doesn't appear to be that far off in that possibility based on enrollment/capacity.

Are these numbers representing the entire school or the four grades that would attend a high school at a given time?

How long did it take for you to look up these numbers? If MCPS paid you $100 an hour, they could have saved millions paying for all of these boundary studies.

You are right, that was whole school. This is for grades 2 through 5, based on 2024-2025 enrollment, at each of the schools:

Crown Dufief 195, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 329, Rosemont 371, Fields Road 292=1457 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 1459/2219=65.6 pct

Wootton Fallsmead 366, Lakewood 285, Cold Spring 291, Ritchie Park 226=1622 Capacity: 1168 Utilization 1168/1936= 60.3 pct

Richard Montgomery Twinbrook 268, Beall 291, College Gardens 351, Bayard Rustin 499=1409 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 1409/2220=63.5 pct

So based on the above it does look like the schools would be underutilized, if just looking at those schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am very confused about the enrollment projections.

Here RMHS is still projected to be over enrolled.

https://www.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/siteassets/district/departments/planning/fy2027/CIP27_Chapter4_Richard-Montgomery-Cluster.pdf

But Option H has them under enrolled. Is this due to the regional programs? And if so, how can they project how many students in region 4 will pick RMHS and how many from RMHS will go elsewhere?

I'm thinking RM will remain over capacity if they don't shift some from RMHS to Crown.

The numbers in option H (and all other options) are only counting resident students (students who live within the boundaries in that option). The CIP is counting this year's actually enrolled students as of Sept. 30th, and then making projections going forward.

That makes no sense for them to use different numbers. H, along with the regional model, doesn't really do that much for RMHS capacity. What a cluster f*.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Different poster, but this is how the numbers would look based off of 2024-2025 enrollment numbers:

Dufief 276, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 372, Rosemont 564, Fields Road 453=2181 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 2181/2219=98.3 pct

Fallsmead 512, Lakewood 406, Cold Spring 362, Ritchie Park 342=1622 Capacity: 1936 Utilization 1622/1936= 83.8 pct

Twinbrook 459, Beall 475, College Gardens 506, Bayard Rustin 757=2197 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 2197/2220=98.96 pct

The above keeps Rio island with Fallsmead and keeps all of Rosemont together, mainly because don't know the actual numbers for the subsets that are in the immediate Crown/Rio area.

But there can be some additional balancing of the schools, including other surrounding schools to balance it out more. But the other poster doesn't appear to be that far off in that possibility based on enrollment/capacity.

Are these numbers representing the entire school or the four grades that would attend a high school at a given time?

How long did it take for you to look up these numbers? If MCPS paid you $100 an hour, they could have saved millions paying for all of these boundary studies.

You are right, that was whole school. This is for grades 2 through 5, based on 2024-2025 enrollment, at each of the schools:

Crown Dufief 195, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 329, Rosemont 371, Fields Road 292=1457 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 1459/2219=65.6 pct

Wootton Fallsmead 366, Lakewood 285, Cold Spring 291, Ritchie Park 226=1622 Capacity: 1168 Utilization 1168/1936= 60.3 pct

Richard Montgomery Twinbrook 268, Beall 291, College Gardens 351, Bayard Rustin 499=1409 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 1409/2220=63.5 pct

So based on the above it does look like the schools would be underutilized, if just looking at those schools.

They will never move RPES out of RM because it brings the higher SES to RM. Remember, that's why RPES first moved to RM out of Wootton in the first place. This is a pipe dream, even if it makes logical sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Different poster, but this is how the numbers would look based off of 2024-2025 enrollment numbers:

Dufief 276, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 372, Rosemont 564, Fields Road 453=2181 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 2181/2219=98.3 pct

Fallsmead 512, Lakewood 406, Cold Spring 362, Ritchie Park 342=1622 Capacity: 1936 Utilization 1622/1936= 83.8 pct

Twinbrook 459, Beall 475, College Gardens 506, Bayard Rustin 757=2197 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 2197/2220=98.96 pct

The above keeps Rio island with Fallsmead and keeps all of Rosemont together, mainly because don't know the actual numbers for the subsets that are in the immediate Crown/Rio area.

But there can be some additional balancing of the schools, including other surrounding schools to balance it out more. But the other poster doesn't appear to be that far off in that possibility based on enrollment/capacity.

Are these numbers representing the entire school or the four grades that would attend a high school at a given time?

How long did it take for you to look up these numbers? If MCPS paid you $100 an hour, they could have saved millions paying for all of these boundary studies.

You are right, that was whole school. This is for grades 2 through 5, based on 2024-2025 enrollment, at each of the schools:

Crown Dufief 195, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 329, Rosemont 371, Fields Road 292=1457 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 1459/2219=65.6 pct

Wootton Fallsmead 366, Lakewood 285, Cold Spring 291, Ritchie Park 226=1622 Capacity: 1168 Utilization 1168/1936= 60.3 pct

Richard Montgomery Twinbrook 268, Beall 291, College Gardens 351, Bayard Rustin 499=1409 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 1409/2220=63.5 pct

So based on the above it does look like the schools would be underutilized, if just looking at those schools.

They will never move RPES out of RM because it brings the higher SES to RM. Remember, that's why RPES first moved to RM out of Wootton in the first place. This is a pipe dream, even if it makes logical sense.

But that makes no sense at this current time given the new developments in Beall.and College Gardens boundaries over the past 20 years and home prices in historic Rockville. Maybe it was true 40 years ago, but there are plenty of higher income neighborhoods in the other RM cluster schools now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Different poster, but this is how the numbers would look based off of 2024-2025 enrollment numbers:

Dufief 276, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 372, Rosemont 564, Fields Road 453=2181 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 2181/2219=98.3 pct

Fallsmead 512, Lakewood 406, Cold Spring 362, Ritchie Park 342=1622 Capacity: 1936 Utilization 1622/1936= 83.8 pct

Twinbrook 459, Beall 475, College Gardens 506, Bayard Rustin 757=2197 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 2197/2220=98.96 pct

The above keeps Rio island with Fallsmead and keeps all of Rosemont together, mainly because don't know the actual numbers for the subsets that are in the immediate Crown/Rio area.

But there can be some additional balancing of the schools, including other surrounding schools to balance it out more. But the other poster doesn't appear to be that far off in that possibility based on enrollment/capacity.

Are these numbers representing the entire school or the four grades that would attend a high school at a given time?

How long did it take for you to look up these numbers? If MCPS paid you $100 an hour, they could have saved millions paying for all of these boundary studies.

You are right, that was whole school. This is for grades 2 through 5, based on 2024-2025 enrollment, at each of the schools:

Crown Dufief 195, Stone Mill 516, Travilah 329, Rosemont 371, Fields Road 292=1457 Capacity: 2219 Utilization 1459/2219=65.6 pct

Wootton Fallsmead 366, Lakewood 285, Cold Spring 291, Ritchie Park 226=1622 Capacity: 1168 Utilization 1168/1936= 60.3 pct

Richard Montgomery Twinbrook 268, Beall 291, College Gardens 351, Bayard Rustin 499=1409 Capacity: 2220 Utilization 1409/2220=63.5 pct

So based on the above it does look like the schools would be underutilized, if just looking at those schools.

They will never move RPES out of RM because it brings the higher SES to RM. Remember, that's why RPES first moved to RM out of Wootton in the first place. This is a pipe dream, even if it makes logical sense.

RM has 9 portables in use in the parking lot now. My child has had classes in portables all 4 years of high schools. What is the plan to relieve overcrowding at RM if no students are moved to another high school?