APS Closing Nottingham

[Anonymous]

I drive by ATS at dismissal most days. It’s not great but it’s not awful. It’s as nutty as any other elementary at dismissal. There are always rogue parents who think traffic rules don’t apply to them. Doubt that Nottingham is any different. Though I’m sure the Notties will tell us otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I drive by ATS at dismissal most days. It’s not great but it’s not awful. It’s as nutty as any other elementary at dismissal. There are always rogue parents who think traffic rules don’t apply to them. Doubt that Nottingham is any different. Though I’m sure the Notties will tell us otherwise.

Yep. It’s like any other elementary school during dismissal.

[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:I have not read the whole thread, but on paper, this whole thing makes a lot of sense to me. We do have excess capacity in that part of Arlington right now, we do need a swing space because we have a lot of old buildings.

I am sorry for the Nottingham community, as someone who has been through a boundary process that chopped up our neighborhood school, it sucked. But as a taxpayer, sorry folks, this is just life. There is no perfect solution, but I think this is a good call on APS' part.

As for traffic, etc. PLEASE. You have no idea. There are lots of neighborhoods in Arlington with multiple schools. Also plenty that have lived through huge construction projects. You will be OK.

I was with you until the traffic comment. The community is very sensitive because of the three tragic, recent deaths.

I live near TJ middle school where a pedestrian was also recently killed. Since we moved here, they have built Fleet and are now adding 1000 seats to the Career Center. They also took our neighborhood elementary school (Henry) and chopped it in half. So, again, I am sympathetic, I am, but I still think this decision makes sense.

Also, with the passage of Missing Middle, Arlington is basically announcing that no one is guaranteed anything, so get used to it, folks.

Oh, I totally agree that this makes sense, but flippant comments about getting over the traffic concerns are really unnecessary given the background of what has happened in the community/Neughborhood.

OK, fair enough. I don't know the whole background. I was just trying to make the point that lots of Arlington neighborhoods have to deal with significant amounts of school related traffic. I am not flippant about pedestrian deaths, and if there have been lots around Nottingham, that is a concern. Arlington Heights had to advocate years ago for a STOP sign on a busy school route. It took a ridiculous amount of time to get it, too. But generally speaking, I don't see APS stopping any projects because of traffic concerns. You will just have to advocate for safety where you can. Every school project has traffic concerns is my point.

For one, a Nottingham mother was killed in front of the school by a truck.

https://jb-lf.org/jennifers-story/

That was awful. But unless you're proposing not having any schools on any major roads, I'm not sure what your point is.

If you were following the thread you’d see the point is that flippant posts about the how community is unnecessarily concerned about additional traffic is uncalled for. Another resident was killed just last year in a crosswalk by the school.

Or maybe people are pointing out that unless you can conclusively prove the drivers were school related, the problem in your neighborhood is actually drivers using Little Falls as a commuter route from Mclean/Falls Church/Arlington to Chain Bridge. Which is an unfortunate but separate issue being used by upset parents.

The first person to die was a parent visiting the school in her car. The parking lot there is not very big- you park on streets if you visit. Not sure how much more conclusive you want.

Is it so very hard to understand that we are concerned that adding more vehicle trips and drop offs to a road with a demonstrably poor safety record could be a problem? Not just for our kids who will be walking further distances and encountering more cut through traffic on their routes, but for the kids and parents using Little Falls as their drop off areas? I can’t think of a worse place to line up several dozen buses and cars than a road that is unsafe even when practically empty.

Taylor, Science Focus also have small parking lots and parents often parks on the street. The Nottingham accident was a garbage truck who wasn’t paying attention so not really due to “traffic” but inattentive driver which literally travels every street in Arlington

Just stop. There were THREE deaths right outside Nottingham. You think that's normal?

Pretty standard if your CA is Parisa Deghani.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

The thing I don’t understand is how we needed cardinal to be built (the school opened two years ago) but now have such an excess of seats that we can close a school. Cardinal’s location was picked because there was a need for seats in that area. Why wasn’t there just an addition built at Nottingham or tuckahoe?
My eldest is in highschool so I was paying attention to all the meetings. I know they had slides showing why you needed a whole new school. I just don’t get why they were so wrong.
Similarly with Hamm— I was actually very involved/paying attention during the boundary discussion then and the site placement discussion. They were so wrong about the projected kids there. So many additional groups wanted to go to hamm, but there “wasn’t space”. Then the school open at 85% capacity! Same with innovation— there “wasn’t space” when they set up the boundary— and it opened at 70%? I think they only had 2 kindergarten classes the year they opened. The projections are so wrong, and the county is making huge monetary decisions based off of them. It’s fiscal irresponsibility!

[Anonymous]

Try talking to the people who live near ATS. Option schools / swing space result in families who mostly do not live in the neighborhood and seem to drive / park / act as if no one else does either. The ATS parents at the old McKinley building speed, block driveways, make illegal u turns and generally behave in ways that parents did not when it was a neighborhood school. Plenty of complaints have been made - APS and Arlington do not care.

I'm an ATS parent. The PTA and school administration regularly remind parents to drive safely and courteously and the 25 mile an hour speed limit is regularly enforced by ACPD. No doubt there are people who continue to drive like jerks, but I think a lot of parents make an effort to not to endanger the community around their children's school. I also live a few blocks from two large schools which impact neighborhood arteries when they start/finish; I simply avoid them at those time if I'm in a particular hurry. I say all this not to be pedantic, but to share that in my experience none of this is as bad as as some Nottingham parents might be fearing. Kids using the bus for a short ride isn't so bad--they hang out for a little while with their neighbors and leave/arrive home a little earlier/later, which some working parents can appreciate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

No trailers will go at Discovery bc those fields are used by the county.

What about the tennis courts at Williamsburg that used to hold a bunch of trailers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

The thing I don’t understand is how we needed cardinal to be built (the school opened two years ago) but now have such an excess of seats that we can close a school. Cardinal’s location was picked because there was a need for seats in that area. Why wasn’t there just an addition built at Nottingham or tuckahoe?
My eldest is in highschool so I was paying attention to all the meetings. I know they had slides showing why you needed a whole new school. I just don’t get why they were so wrong.
Similarly with Hamm— I was actually very involved/paying attention during the boundary discussion then and the site placement discussion. They were so wrong about the projected kids there. So many additional groups wanted to go to hamm, but there “wasn’t space”. Then the school open at 85% capacity! Same with innovation— there “wasn’t space” when they set up the boundary— and it opened at 70%? I think they only had 2 kindergarten classes the year they opened. The projections are so wrong, and the county is making huge monetary decisions based off of them. It’s fiscal irresponsibility!

Cardinal's location wasn't really "picked." APS built there because they own the land (although McKinley was overcrowded at the time - but not 731 seats overcrowded). They system needed the seats, thus the shuffle to use the Key building where it was needed in Courthouse and close down McKinley when Cardinal opened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

The thing I don’t understand is how we needed cardinal to be built (the school opened two years ago) but now have such an excess of seats that we can close a school. Cardinal’s location was picked because there was a need for seats in that area. Why wasn’t there just an addition built at Nottingham or tuckahoe?
My eldest is in highschool so I was paying attention to all the meetings. I know they had slides showing why you needed a whole new school. I just don’t get why they were so wrong.
Similarly with Hamm— I was actually very involved/paying attention during the boundary discussion then and the site placement discussion. They were so wrong about the projected kids there. So many additional groups wanted to go to hamm, but there “wasn’t space”. Then the school open at 85% capacity! Same with innovation— there “wasn’t space” when they set up the boundary— and it opened at 70%? I think they only had 2 kindergarten classes the year they opened. The projections are so wrong, and the county is making huge monetary decisions based off of them. It’s fiscal irresponsibility!

I'm not sure what happened at Hamm, but I know what happened with Innovation. There were 4 kindergarten classes this year, FWIW.

1. There was a lot of uncertainty about how many neighborhood kids would transfer to the new Key location. Key supporters said many would not move, but in the end almost everyone went.
2. A lot of space was left for students from new developments in the pipeline. For example, Queens Court (a CAF building) was not open at the beginning of the 21-22 school year but now is. Also, Marbella Apartments are being redeveloped into two high rise towers (also CAF) that will produce another at least 100 kids for the elementary school. That's not counting all of the market rate buildings that are going up. Those will have some kids, but obviously not on the scale of the CAF buildings.
3. 5th graders were grandfathered in at ASFS if they wanted, so the 5th grade was particularly small last year.

Enrollment has been steadily growing since the school opened. The Sept 2021 count was 397 including preschool, February 2023 (most recent on the website right now) was 488.

[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:I have not read the whole thread, but on paper, this whole thing makes a lot of sense to me. We do have excess capacity in that part of Arlington right now, we do need a swing space because we have a lot of old buildings.

I am sorry for the Nottingham community, as someone who has been through a boundary process that chopped up our neighborhood school, it sucked. But as a taxpayer, sorry folks, this is just life. There is no perfect solution, but I think this is a good call on APS' part.

As for traffic, etc. PLEASE. You have no idea. There are lots of neighborhoods in Arlington with multiple schools. Also plenty that have lived through huge construction projects. You will be OK.

I was with you until the traffic comment. The community is very sensitive because of the three tragic, recent deaths.

I live near TJ middle school where a pedestrian was also recently killed. Since we moved here, they have built Fleet and are now adding 1000 seats to the Career Center. They also took our neighborhood elementary school (Henry) and chopped it in half. So, again, I am sympathetic, I am, but I still think this decision makes sense.

Also, with the passage of Missing Middle, Arlington is basically announcing that no one is guaranteed anything, so get used to it, folks.

Oh, I totally agree that this makes sense, but flippant comments about getting over the traffic concerns are really unnecessary given the background of what has happened in the community/Neughborhood.

OK, fair enough. I don't know the whole background. I was just trying to make the point that lots of Arlington neighborhoods have to deal with significant amounts of school related traffic. I am not flippant about pedestrian deaths, and if there have been lots around Nottingham, that is a concern. Arlington Heights had to advocate years ago for a STOP sign on a busy school route. It took a ridiculous amount of time to get it, too. But generally speaking, I don't see APS stopping any projects because of traffic concerns. You will just have to advocate for safety where you can. Every school project has traffic concerns is my point.

For one, a Nottingham mother was killed in front of the school by a truck.

https://jb-lf.org/jennifers-story/

That was awful. But unless you're proposing not having any schools on any major roads, I'm not sure what your point is.

If you were following the thread you’d see the point is that flippant posts about the how community is unnecessarily concerned about additional traffic is uncalled for. Another resident was killed just last year in a crosswalk by the school.

Or maybe people are pointing out that unless you can conclusively prove the drivers were school related, the problem in your neighborhood is actually drivers using Little Falls as a commuter route from Mclean/Falls Church/Arlington to Chain Bridge. Which is an unfortunate but separate issue being used by upset parents.

The first person to die was a parent visiting the school in her car. The parking lot there is not very big- you park on streets if you visit. Not sure how much more conclusive you want.

Is it so very hard to understand that we are concerned that adding more vehicle trips and drop offs to a road with a demonstrably poor safety record could be a problem? Not just for our kids who will be walking further distances and encountering more cut through traffic on their routes, but for the kids and parents using Little Falls as their drop off areas? I can’t think of a worse place to line up several dozen buses and cars than a road that is unsafe even when practically empty.

Taylor, Science Focus also have small parking lots and parents often parks on the street. The Nottingham accident was a garbage truck who wasn’t paying attention so not really due to “traffic” but inattentive driver which literally travels every street in Arlington

Just stop. There were THREE deaths right outside Nottingham. You think that's normal?

Pretty standard if your CA is Parisa Deghani.

Look I'm not a Parisa fan either but it's kind of a stretch to blame her for unsafe roads and deaths that happened before she was CA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Try talking to the people who live near ATS. Option schools / swing space result in families who mostly do not live in the neighborhood and seem to drive / park / act as if no one else does either. The ATS parents at the old McKinley building speed, block driveways, make illegal u turns and generally behave in ways that parents did not when it was a neighborhood school. Plenty of complaints have been made - APS and Arlington do not care.

I'm an ATS parent. The PTA and school administration regularly remind parents to drive safely and courteously and the 25 mile an hour speed limit is regularly enforced by ACPD. No doubt there are people who continue to drive like jerks, but I think a lot of parents make an effort to not to endanger the community around their children's school. I also live a few blocks from two large schools which impact neighborhood arteries when they start/finish; I simply avoid them at those time if I'm in a particular hurry. I say all this not to be pedantic, but to share that in my experience none of this is as bad as as some Nottingham parents might be fearing. Kids using the bus for a short ride isn't so bad--they hang out for a little while with their neighbors and leave/arrive home a little earlier/later, which some working parents can appreciate.

So in other words you know nothing about traffic patterns around N'ham. Got it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

The thing I don’t understand is how we needed cardinal to be built (the school opened two years ago) but now have such an excess of seats that we can close a school. Cardinal’s location was picked because there was a need for seats in that area. Why wasn’t there just an addition built at Nottingham or tuckahoe?
My eldest is in highschool so I was paying attention to all the meetings. I know they had slides showing why you needed a whole new school. I just don’t get why they were so wrong.
Similarly with Hamm— I was actually very involved/paying attention during the boundary discussion then and the site placement discussion. They were so wrong about the projected kids there. So many additional groups wanted to go to hamm, but there “wasn’t space”. Then the school open at 85% capacity! Same with innovation— there “wasn’t space” when they set up the boundary— and it opened at 70%? I think they only had 2 kindergarten classes the year they opened. The projections are so wrong, and the county is making huge monetary decisions based off of them. It’s fiscal irresponsibility!

Cardinal's location wasn't really "picked." APS built there because they own the land (although McKinley was overcrowded at the time - but not 731 seats overcrowded). They system needed the seats, thus the shuffle to use the Key building where it was needed in Courthouse and close down McKinley when Cardinal opened.

Ooh. Ooh! Gather around children, and I will tell you the story of Cardinal elementary. It’s a cautionary tale. Long ago, seats were needed in N Arlington. So a school was built at Discovery and a large addition was put on McKinley (now ATS). Then, Arlington needed more seats to the south and east. But the only building space owned by APS that was appropriate for an elementary was to the north in Westover. Enter the O.G. Of N Arlington whiners. Westover residents. They extracted a completely unreasonable promise from multiple school board members (Kanninen, van doren, that crew) that they would stand down, if APS built them a neighborhood elementary on that site. Never mind that no seats were needed there. So that is what happened. This lead to the ridiculously expensive cascading school moves for innovation, key, ATS, and McKinley—when they could have just moved key to Westover. But because the seats were never needed around Westover, they ended up with boundaries pushed far further south and east than they wanted. And many of those who insisted that Westover have a neighborhood school are now in danger of being bussed to Tuckahoe! And Cardinal now has many busses from the old McKinley. We don’t need seats in this area. We need to move option schools to make seats in the south. I suspect that is what will happen to Nottingham after it is used as swing space. And they richly deserve it for refusing to take any additional planning units during the era of extreme over crowding before Discovery was built. That was back in the heyday when North Arlington whiners got whatever they wanted from the school board. Karma’s a relaxing thought!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

The thing I don’t understand is how we needed cardinal to be built (the school opened two years ago) but now have such an excess of seats that we can close a school. Cardinal’s location was picked because there was a need for seats in that area. Why wasn’t there just an addition built at Nottingham or tuckahoe?
My eldest is in highschool so I was paying attention to all the meetings. I know they had slides showing why you needed a whole new school. I just don’t get why they were so wrong.
Similarly with Hamm— I was actually very involved/paying attention during the boundary discussion then and the site placement discussion. They were so wrong about the projected kids there. So many additional groups wanted to go to hamm, but there “wasn’t space”. Then the school open at 85% capacity! Same with innovation— there “wasn’t space” when they set up the boundary— and it opened at 70%? I think they only had 2 kindergarten classes the year they opened. The projections are so wrong, and the county is making huge monetary decisions based off of them. It’s fiscal irresponsibility!

Cardinal's location wasn't really "picked." APS built there because they own the land (although McKinley was overcrowded at the time - but not 731 seats overcrowded). They system needed the seats, thus the shuffle to use the Key building where it was needed in Courthouse and close down McKinley when Cardinal opened.

Ooh. Ooh! Gather around children, and I will tell you the story of Cardinal elementary. It’s a cautionary tale. Long ago, seats were needed in N Arlington. So a school was built at Discovery and a large addition was put on McKinley (now ATS). Then, Arlington needed more seats to the south and east. But the only building space owned by APS that was appropriate for an elementary was to the north in Westover. Enter the O.G. Of N Arlington whiners. Westover residents. They extracted a completely unreasonable promise from multiple school board members (Kanninen, van doren, that crew) that they would stand down, if APS built them a neighborhood elementary on that site. Never mind that no seats were needed there. So that is what happened. This lead to the ridiculously expensive cascading school moves for innovation, key, ATS, and McKinley—when they could have just moved key to Westover. But because the seats were never needed around Westover, they ended up with boundaries pushed far further south and east than they wanted. And many of those who insisted that Westover have a neighborhood school are now in danger of being bussed to Tuckahoe! And Cardinal now has many busses from the old McKinley. We don’t need seats in this area. We need to move option schools to make seats in the south. I suspect that is what will happen to Nottingham after it is used as swing space. And they richly deserve it for refusing to take any additional planning units during the era of extreme over crowding before Discovery was built. That was back in the heyday when North Arlington whiners got whatever they wanted from the school board. Karma’s a relaxing thought!

This story leaves a few things out. Before Discovery was built, APS wanted to build the new elementary at Westover, perhaps along with an addition at Nottingham. But the Westover whiners opposed it. That's how we got Discovery, even though it isn't a good place for an elementary school.

Also weird to accuse Nottingham of refusing to take additional planning units in the era of extreme overcrowding before Discovery was built. Let's review. In that era, Nottingham was at 140% capacity, and it was the most overcrowded school in the system. No one proposed sending more kids to them, but this PP thinks they should have somehow taken even more. Good god, what is wrong with people?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

The thing I don’t understand is how we needed cardinal to be built (the school opened two years ago) but now have such an excess of seats that we can close a school. Cardinal’s location was picked because there was a need for seats in that area. Why wasn’t there just an addition built at Nottingham or tuckahoe?
My eldest is in highschool so I was paying attention to all the meetings. I know they had slides showing why you needed a whole new school. I just don’t get why they were so wrong.
Similarly with Hamm— I was actually very involved/paying attention during the boundary discussion then and the site placement discussion. They were so wrong about the projected kids there. So many additional groups wanted to go to hamm, but there “wasn’t space”. Then the school open at 85% capacity! Same with innovation— there “wasn’t space” when they set up the boundary— and it opened at 70%? I think they only had 2 kindergarten classes the year they opened. The projections are so wrong, and the county is making huge monetary decisions based off of them. It’s fiscal irresponsibility!

Cardinal's location wasn't really "picked." APS built there because they own the land (although McKinley was overcrowded at the time - but not 731 seats overcrowded). They system needed the seats, thus the shuffle to use the Key building where it was needed in Courthouse and close down McKinley when Cardinal opened.

Ooh. Ooh! Gather around children, and I will tell you the story of Cardinal elementary. It’s a cautionary tale. Long ago, seats were needed in N Arlington. So a school was built at Discovery and a large addition was put on McKinley (now ATS). Then, Arlington needed more seats to the south and east. But the only building space owned by APS that was appropriate for an elementary was to the north in Westover. Enter the O.G. Of N Arlington whiners. Westover residents. They extracted a completely unreasonable promise from multiple school board members (Kanninen, van doren, that crew) that they would stand down, if APS built them a neighborhood elementary on that site. Never mind that no seats were needed there. So that is what happened. This lead to the ridiculously expensive cascading school moves for innovation, key, ATS, and McKinley—when they could have just moved key to Westover. But because the seats were never needed around Westover, they ended up with boundaries pushed far further south and east than they wanted. And many of those who insisted that Westover have a neighborhood school are now in danger of being bussed to Tuckahoe! And Cardinal now has many busses from the old McKinley. We don’t need seats in this area. We need to move option schools to make seats in the south. I suspect that is what will happen to Nottingham after it is used as swing space. And they richly deserve it for refusing to take any additional planning units during the era of extreme over crowding before Discovery was built. That was back in the heyday when North Arlington whiners got whatever they wanted from the school board. Karma’s a relaxing thought!

This story leaves a few things out. Before Discovery was built, APS wanted to build the new elementary at Westover, perhaps along with an addition at Nottingham. But the Westover whiners opposed it. That's how we got Discovery, even though it isn't a good place for an elementary school.

Also weird to accuse Nottingham of refusing to take additional planning units in the era of extreme overcrowding before Discovery was built. Let's review. In that era, Nottingham was at 140% capacity, and it was the most overcrowded school in the system. No one proposed sending more kids to them, but this PP thinks they should have somehow taken even more. Good god, what is wrong with people?

Maybe PP is thinking about the 2018 go round when Notties tried to throw Tuckahoe and then McKinley under the bus. So many options to choose from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

The thing I don’t understand is how we needed cardinal to be built (the school opened two years ago) but now have such an excess of seats that we can close a school. Cardinal’s location was picked because there was a need for seats in that area. Why wasn’t there just an addition built at Nottingham or tuckahoe?
My eldest is in highschool so I was paying attention to all the meetings. I know they had slides showing why you needed a whole new school. I just don’t get why they were so wrong.
Similarly with Hamm— I was actually very involved/paying attention during the boundary discussion then and the site placement discussion. They were so wrong about the projected kids there. So many additional groups wanted to go to hamm, but there “wasn’t space”. Then the school open at 85% capacity! Same with innovation— there “wasn’t space” when they set up the boundary— and it opened at 70%? I think they only had 2 kindergarten classes the year they opened. The projections are so wrong, and the county is making huge monetary decisions based off of them. It’s fiscal irresponsibility!

I'm not sure what happened at Hamm, but I know what happened with Innovation. There were 4 kindergarten classes this year, FWIW.

1. There was a lot of uncertainty about how many neighborhood kids would transfer to the new Key location. Key supporters said many would not move, but in the end almost everyone went.
2. A lot of space was left for students from new developments in the pipeline. For example, Queens Court (a CAF building) was not open at the beginning of the 21-22 school year but now is. Also, Marbella Apartments are being redeveloped into two high rise towers (also CAF) that will produce another at least 100 kids for the elementary school. That's not counting all of the market rate buildings that are going up. Those will have some kids, but obviously not on the scale of the CAF buildings.
3. 5th graders were grandfathered in at ASFS if they wanted, so the 5th grade was particularly small last year.

Enrollment has been steadily growing since the school opened. The Sept 2021 count was 397 including preschool, February 2023 (most recent on the website right now) was 488.

What do they think the capacity is of Innovation. Close to 300 kids are expected in 2025 from Marbella. I don’t know the capacity of the school but I’m really wondering how the math works. Will they add additional trailers there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there actually enough seats at neighboring schools though? Real seats in the building not trailers? I can handle moving but I will be unhappy if they move my kid out of a Nott classroom into a trailer at Tuckahoe.

The thing I don’t understand is how we needed cardinal to be built (the school opened two years ago) but now have such an excess of seats that we can close a school. Cardinal’s location was picked because there was a need for seats in that area. Why wasn’t there just an addition built at Nottingham or tuckahoe?
My eldest is in highschool so I was paying attention to all the meetings. I know they had slides showing why you needed a whole new school. I just don’t get why they were so wrong.
Similarly with Hamm— I was actually very involved/paying attention during the boundary discussion then and the site placement discussion. They were so wrong about the projected kids there. So many additional groups wanted to go to hamm, but there “wasn’t space”. Then the school open at 85% capacity! Same with innovation— there “wasn’t space” when they set up the boundary— and it opened at 70%? I think they only had 2 kindergarten classes the year they opened. The projections are so wrong, and the county is making huge monetary decisions based off of them. It’s fiscal irresponsibility!

I'm not sure what happened at Hamm, but I know what happened with Innovation. There were 4 kindergarten classes this year, FWIW.

1. There was a lot of uncertainty about how many neighborhood kids would transfer to the new Key location. Key supporters said many would not move, but in the end almost everyone went.
2. A lot of space was left for students from new developments in the pipeline. For example, Queens Court (a CAF building) was not open at the beginning of the 21-22 school year but now is. Also, Marbella Apartments are being redeveloped into two high rise towers (also CAF) that will produce another at least 100 kids for the elementary school. That's not counting all of the market rate buildings that are going up. Those will have some kids, but obviously not on the scale of the CAF buildings.
3. 5th graders were grandfathered in at ASFS if they wanted, so the 5th grade was particularly small last year.

Enrollment has been steadily growing since the school opened. The Sept 2021 count was 397 including preschool, February 2023 (most recent on the website right now) was 488.

What do they think the capacity is of Innovation. Close to 300 kids are expected in 2025 from Marbella. I don’t know the capacity of the school but I’m really wondering how the math works. Will they add additional trailers there?

NM. It looks like they have the capacity of Innovation at 653. Maybe that works if Marbella is the last CAF building assigned there?