B-CC/WJ capacity cluster meeting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So they are considering expanding current schools in both clusters to have 740 students each? How does that work in the Rosemary Hills area - it would have 740 students, and then half the students would go to CCES and the other half to NCC, but each of those schools would need to have 740 students? The math does not work.

The WJ elementary schools are already all built (or in the midst of being built) to 715-770. They are looking at taking more of the B-CC cluster elementary schools to that size but a parameter of this capacity study was that they are not considering de-coupling RH, NCC and CC. So they are not looking at taking those 3 up to 740. For example, the NCC site is relatively large and relatively flat with good bus access and could pretty easily accommodate a larger school, but they did not consider that option due to the priority for keeping the RH/NCC/CC grouping intact.

In other words, you are correct that the math doesn't work for those three schools to remain linked but each go to 740.

Thanks. I'm surprised they are not even considering decoupling.

Undoing the pairing with RHPS - "decoupling" - would essentially re-segregate the cluster. I doubt they could do it.

I live in the cluster. I went to the school in the cluster when it was desegregated. I certainly wouldn't support re-segregation, and I think that many parents feel the same. I also don't think legally it would be viable to uncouple schools. There would likely be law suits to oppose.

I also live in the cluster. Everyone I know, no matter where they live, would like to have one ES to go to. People who live near RHES would like to stay there; those near CCES would like to go there; and those near NCC there. RHES is way too big and is like Lord of the Flies at lunch and recess. (I know; I regularly volunteer then.) And it makes no sense to start with a huge school for K-2 when a more nurturing environment is desired and then move to a smaller school about half the size for 3-5. I know of no one happy with the current arrangement.

Actually, a lot of parents like that RHPS is only K-2 and consider that "nurturing" -- I agree that lunch is not handled well, but that is a principal management issues. Playground and lunch both need better and kinder supervision and more eyes on playground.

There is nothing nurturing about RHES. The principal keeps that from happening.

They will not get more staff for lunch and recess. The principal said they get one adult for every 50 kids, per MCPS policy. When I volunteer there, much of my time at recess is spent shuffling injured kids with bloody noses to the nurse.

again, that is a management issue, not a building/pairing issue. Lobby for more volunteers, press the school sytem for more aides as a special exception to ratio due to all K-2, and make it clear that MCPS has been warned about the playground liability they are facing.

What you describe is no reason to re-segregate.

The real problem is that the RHES principal is awful. she doesn’t give a damn what anyone thinks, teachers, staff, parents. She somehow keeps her job. Even with the terrible principal, the families I know who live near the school would prefer to go there all 5 years for the convenience.

BTW: why isn’t busing used to integrate Bethesda schools, as it is in Chevy Chase?

.

Because not enough non-white people live in Bethesda west of Wisconsin Ave. Thus, the only geographic are which offers proximity to a large enough non-white population at a reasonable distance is ChCh btween Wisc and 16th St. The trade-offs for busing (travel time v. integration) there are more reasonable.

There are not enough minorities in the Whitman cluster to do integration and to even try would mean schlepping kids very far distances.

This is why the real long term solution to school segregation is a housing market where people live in integrated communities. This is still not the case in much of MoCo and won’t be until we get serious as a county about making developers build a larger portion of affordable housing in their ridiculous high-end plans. (Downtown Bethesda, I’m looking at you!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Because not enough non-white people live in Bethesda west of Wisconsin Ave. Thus, the only geographic are which offers proximity to a large enough non-white population at a reasonable distance is ChCh btween Wisc and 16th St. The trade-offs for busing (travel time v. integration) there are more reasonable.

There are not enough minorities in the Whitman cluster to do integration and to even try would mean schlepping kids very far distances.

This is why the real long term solution to school segregation is a housing market where people live in integrated communities. This is still not the case in much of MoCo and won’t be until we get serious as a county about making developers build a larger portion of affordable housing in their ridiculous high-end plans. (Downtown Bethesda, I’m looking at you!)

Some developers are already proferring 25%, which is the maximum. Is that enough for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know why Somerset is so severely under capacity?

It's great for the kids/parents who live/attend that school, it's just such a different dynamic than all of the other schools on this list.

Sorry, meant to type Westbrook!

It’s catchment area is all SFHs, so there is very low density in that part of the cluster. It would make sense to move some of the high rise buildings in Friendship Heights that are now in Somerset into Westbrook. Then you could move some of the crowding in the Bethesda ES catchment into Somerset.

I agree as things stand now, that would make sense. However, I think it's more likely they will rezone the coming Westbard redevelopment for Westbrook (it currently is zoned for Wood Acres). That has the added benefit of having those future kids go to Westland (which they are directly next to, and which has capacity after Silver Creek has opened) rather than Pyle.

I have nothing to base this on, it's just speculation - but it makes a ton of sense.

ITA, except the problem will be in HS because B-CC has now expanded so much it has run out of room to expand any more.

Right. They could split-articulate and do Westbrook, Westland, Whitman instead.

You also have existing capacity within the Whitman cluster at Carderock and Bradley Hills and a couple small schools that could be expanded with additions to absorb the Westbard development within the existing cluster. No need to overextend BCC further.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know why Somerset is so severely under capacity?

It's great for the kids/parents who live/attend that school, it's just such a different dynamic than all of the other schools on this list.

Sorry, meant to type Westbrook!

It’s catchment area is all SFHs, so there is very low density in that part of the cluster. It would make sense to move some of the high rise buildings in Friendship Heights that are now in Somerset into Westbrook. Then you could move some of the crowding in the Bethesda ES catchment into Somerset.

I agree as things stand now, that would make sense. However, I think it's more likely they will rezone the coming Westbard redevelopment for Westbrook (it currently is zoned for Wood Acres). That has the added benefit of having those future kids go to Westland (which they are directly next to, and which has capacity after Silver Creek has opened) rather than Pyle.

I have nothing to base this on, it's just speculation - but it makes a ton of sense.

ITA, except the problem will be in HS because B-CC has now expanded so much it has run out of room to expand any more.

PP here, and absolutely. But isn't Whitman similarly full to the brim? Perhaps make room at BCC by shifting kids to WJ?

Not sure what can be done here, but it illustrates that the planning can't just address the issues now, but needs to deal with things that are coming 5, 10, and 15 years down the road.

There's no room at WJ for more kids. They're already adding more portables.

And I really don't get the "no need for an 8th ES" in the WJ cluster, either. Ashburton is packed; GPES got a complete rev/ex maybe 7 years ago and has had to put portables on the blacktop of the playground, take away the music room, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

PP here, and absolutely. But isn't Whitman similarly full to the brim? Perhaps make room at BCC by shifting kids to WJ?

Not sure what can be done here, but it illustrates that the planning can't just address the issues now, but needs to deal with things that are coming 5, 10, and 15 years down the road.

Walter Johnson is so over capacity that MCPS decided to reopen Woodward as a high school.

[Anonymous]

I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

What a good thing that MCPS is doing a boundary analysis to assess the feasibility of ideas just like this one!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

Sorry. Disregard Einstein. But the others could all contribute one ES, sliding it east into Woodward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

What a good thing that MCPS is doing a boundary analysis to assess the feasibility of ideas just like this one!

But, it seems like they aren’t really doing this. If you keep looking at adding additions to existing ES buildings and also won’t consider returning the BCC elementary schools to neighborhood K-5 buildings, you are not really focusing on getting each kid into a right-sized, non-overcrowded school with a reasonable commute all the way through HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

What a good thing that MCPS is doing a boundary analysis to assess the feasibility of ideas just like this one!

But, it seems like they aren’t really doing this. If you keep looking at adding additions to existing ES buildings and also won’t consider returning the BCC elementary schools to neighborhood K-5 buildings, you are not really focusing on getting each kid into a right-sized, non-overcrowded school with a reasonable commute all the way through HS.

Yes, they actually are doing this. In fact, there will be a public hearing about the boundary analysis on November 18, probably in Rockville. You can go and make your suggestion.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/public-hearing-planned-for-school-boundary-analysis/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

What a good thing that MCPS is doing a boundary analysis to assess the feasibility of ideas just like this one!

But, it seems like they aren’t really doing this. If you keep looking at adding additions to existing ES buildings and also won’t consider returning the BCC elementary schools to neighborhood K-5 buildings, you are not really focusing on getting each kid into a right-sized, non-overcrowded school with a reasonable commute all the way through HS.

Yes, they actually are doing this. In fact, there will be a public hearing about the boundary analysis on November 18, probably in Rockville. You can go and make your suggestion.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/public-hearing-planned-for-school-boundary-analysis/

Please don’t go make your suggestion without knowing more about the history or the plans to re-open Woodward. The Superintendent and BOE have been saying that re-opening Woodward is to relieve overcrowding at WJ and in the DCC. Don’t go suggest it pull kids only from WJ, BCC and Whitman without knowing that the plan has always included the DCC (the Einstein and Wheaton base areas are closest).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

What a good thing that MCPS is doing a boundary analysis to assess the feasibility of ideas just like this one!

But, it seems like they aren’t really doing this. If you keep looking at adding additions to existing ES buildings and also won’t consider returning the BCC elementary schools to neighborhood K-5 buildings, you are not really focusing on getting each kid into a right-sized, non-overcrowded school with a reasonable commute all the way through HS.

Yes, they actually are doing this. In fact, there will be a public hearing about the boundary analysis on November 18, probably in Rockville. You can go and make your suggestion.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/public-hearing-planned-for-school-boundary-analysis/

Please don’t go make your suggestion without knowing more about the history or the plans to re-open Woodward. The Superintendent and BOE have been saying that re-opening Woodward is to relieve overcrowding at WJ and in the DCC. Don’t go suggest it pull kids only from WJ, BCC and Whitman without knowing that the plan has always included the DCC (the Einstein and Wheaton base areas are closest).

You would rather someone not make a suggestion that does not align with the initial plans? Seems like you have an agenda here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

What a good thing that MCPS is doing a boundary analysis to assess the feasibility of ideas just like this one!

But, it seems like they aren’t really doing this. If you keep looking at adding additions to existing ES buildings and also won’t consider returning the BCC elementary schools to neighborhood K-5 buildings, you are not really focusing on getting each kid into a right-sized, non-overcrowded school with a reasonable commute all the way through HS.

Yes, they actually are doing this. In fact, there will be a public hearing about the boundary analysis on November 18, probably in Rockville. You can go and make your suggestion.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/public-hearing-planned-for-school-boundary-analysis/

Please don’t go make your suggestion without knowing more about the history or the plans to re-open Woodward. The Superintendent and BOE have been saying that re-opening Woodward is to relieve overcrowding at WJ and in the DCC. Don’t go suggest it pull kids only from WJ, BCC and Whitman without knowing that the plan has always included the DCC (the Einstein and Wheaton base areas are closest).

Isn’t there more open space in the DCC than in the Bethesda/Chevy Chase area that is very dense. It seems like they need Woodward and another site in the DCC to actually deal with all the overcrowding in lower MoCo. There is no need to pit overcrowded school against each other. Instead advocate for doing both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know much about the new plans for Woodward, but it seems like you could easily fill up a new cluster by siphoning off the excess from the already overcrowded Whitman, BCC, WJ, and possibly Einstein and Richard Montgomery clusters. If you shifted one ES east in each cluster, you could then redistribute the other ES boundaries. It doesn’t seem practical to keep stuffing more kids into the existing elementary schools just to overcrowd the MS and HS.

What a good thing that MCPS is doing a boundary analysis to assess the feasibility of ideas just like this one!

But, it seems like they aren’t really doing this. If you keep looking at adding additions to existing ES buildings and also won’t consider returning the BCC elementary schools to neighborhood K-5 buildings, you are not really focusing on getting each kid into a right-sized, non-overcrowded school with a reasonable commute all the way through HS.

Yes, they actually are doing this. In fact, there will be a public hearing about the boundary analysis on November 18, probably in Rockville. You can go and make your suggestion.

https://bethesdamagazine.com/bethesda-beat/schools/public-hearing-planned-for-school-boundary-analysis/

Please don’t go make your suggestion without knowing more about the history or the plans to re-open Woodward. The Superintendent and BOE have been saying that re-opening Woodward is to relieve overcrowding at WJ and in the DCC. Don’t go suggest it pull kids only from WJ, BCC and Whitman without knowing that the plan has always included the DCC (the Einstein and Wheaton base areas are closest).

Isn’t there more open space in the DCC than in the Bethesda/Chevy Chase area that is very dense. It seems like they need Woodward and another site in the DCC to actually deal with all the overcrowding in lower MoCo. There is no need to pit overcrowded school against each other. Instead advocate for doing both.

Well, what they need is 25-30 acres in inside-the-beltway DCC, which is about as dense as Bethesda and Chevy Chase. The former hospital site in Takoma Park is about the only place that might work for a HS. But I gather it's prohibitively expensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Isn’t there more open space in the DCC than in the Bethesda/Chevy Chase area that is very dense. It seems like they need Woodward and another site in the DCC to actually deal with all the overcrowding in lower MoCo. There is no need to pit overcrowded school against each other. Instead advocate for doing both.

The short answer is no, there is not more open space in the DCC than in Bethesda/Chevy Chase.