APS: Think the "no move" campaign is going to work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Reed was built because there is a seat deficit in the county, along with a shortage of sites available to APS for building schools. They build where they can.

But if that's the case, APS can't expect to reduce the number of kids that are bused, and boundaries are going to have to be strange.

Unless they move an option school there to fill excess seats and free up more neighborhood seats in areas with seat deficits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reed was built because there is a seat deficit in the county, along with a shortage of sites available to APS for building schools. They build where they can.

But if that's the case, APS can't expect to reduce the number of kids that are bused, and boundaries are going to have to be strange.

Unless they move an option school there to fill excess seats and free up more neighborhood seats in areas with seat deficits.

Yes, but then you are still busing kids to the option school near the edge of the county. This is based on the assumption that large numbers of kids from other parts of the county will travel to a faraway option school. The data suggests that option schools draw heavily from nearby neighborhoods, so the problem of schools not being where they are needed isn't solved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reed was built because there is a seat deficit in the county, along with a shortage of sites available to APS for building schools. They build where they can.

But if that's the case, APS can't expect to reduce the number of kids that are bused, and boundaries are going to have to be strange.

Unless they move an option school there to fill excess seats and free up more neighborhood seats in areas with seat deficits.

Yes, but then you are still busing kids to the option school near the edge of the county. This is based on the assumption that large numbers of kids from other parts of the county will travel to a faraway option school. The data suggests that option schools draw heavily from nearby neighborhoods, so the problem of schools not being where they are needed isn't solved.

They draw disproportionately from surrounding schools, but let’s not exaggerate the effect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reed was built because there is a seat deficit in the county, along with a shortage of sites available to APS for building schools. They build where they can.

But if that's the case, APS can't expect to reduce the number of kids that are bused, and boundaries are going to have to be strange.

Unless they move an option school there to fill excess seats and free up more neighborhood seats in areas with seat deficits.

Yes, but then you are still busing kids to the option school near the edge of the county. This is based on the assumption that large numbers of kids from other parts of the county will travel to a faraway option school. The data suggests that option schools draw heavily from nearby neighborhoods, so the problem of schools not being where they are needed isn't solved.

So what’s your great solution?

[Anonymous]

I am in favor of keeping option schools in central locations if the goal is to truly make them accessible. I think this is an APS goal, and why they took away neighborhood preference. Option schools do a lot to close the opportunity gap. I don't fully understand the perspective of those for the move. A lot of people will be affected regardless.

[Anonymous]

Just move already. Who gets sentimental about an ugly building in some weird, semi-rich, semi-dumpy area a metro?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just move already. Who gets sentimental about an ugly building in some weird, semi-rich, semi-dumpy area a metro?

^ near

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just move already. Who gets sentimental about an ugly building in some weird, semi-rich, semi-dumpy area a metro?

^ near

The parents who care about being close to the metro for their own commutes but are claiming they don't want Key to move for the program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The AEM/Key map is SO bad. Thanks for proving the staff's point.

Anyone else notice that they take Ashlawn's tail away and give it to McKinley in the demographics focused map? Ashlawn then drops into S. Arlington, but McKinley stays above 50. In other words, despite the fact Ashlawn is one of the only schools who already has a strong demographic mix, a ton of Ashlawn's current population has to be swapped out so McKinley can attain diversity without going south of 50. Unbelievable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AEM/Key map is SO bad. Thanks for proving the staff's point.

Anyone else notice that they take Ashlawn's tail away and give it to McKinley in the demographics focused map? Ashlawn then drops into S. Arlington, but McKinley stays above 50. In other words, despite the fact Ashlawn is one of the only schools who already has a strong demographic mix, a ton of Ashlawn's current population has to be swapped out so McKinley can attain diversity without going south of 50. Unbelievable.

Thanks for catching that. Their motivations become clearer by the day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am in favor of keeping option schools in central locations if the goal is to truly make them accessible. I think this is an APS goal, and why they took away neighborhood preference. Option schools do a lot to close the opportunity gap. I don't fully understand the perspective of those for the move. A lot of people will be affected regardless.

There are only so many “central” locations to put option schools. Key itself isn’t exactly central. Neither are Campbell and Claremont. Are you petitioning for those schools to move?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reed was built because there is a seat deficit in the county, along with a shortage of sites available to APS for building schools. They build where they can.

But if that's the case, APS can't expect to reduce the number of kids that are bused, and boundaries are going to have to be strange.

Unless they move an option school there to fill excess seats and free up more neighborhood seats in areas with seat deficits.

Yes, but then you are still busing kids to the option school near the edge of the county. This is based on the assumption that large numbers of kids from other parts of the county will travel to a faraway option school. The data suggests that option schools draw heavily from nearby neighborhoods, so the problem of schools not being where they are needed isn't solved.

The county promised those neighbors around Reed that there wouldn’t be a handful of buses. I have no idea how those conversations went and if that’s just being nice to a neighborhood request or a real issue. I mean 13 buses plus special education buses are a lot and isn’t workable at every school site no matter how easy it would be as a solution. How old is the road and narrow. Does the school have a parking lot? Does it share a lot of near by parking with other needs (businesses or another school).

I know this is one of the reasons my neighborhood school would never make it this far in the consideration for an option site. Fewest parking spaces in the county and very shared and limited street parking. Can only accommodate 4 buses at the school lot at a time. Logistically and honesty safety it would never work. Drivers from the school next door are already careless and frustrated with the way the buses who have to wait for a special ed bus or other buses to pull out and just have to sit and block the entire road. Lots of close calls with high school drivers or grazing cars.
I can’t imagine if nearly 10 more buses were added.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reed was built because there is a seat deficit in the county, along with a shortage of sites available to APS for building schools. They build where they can.

But if that's the case, APS can't expect to reduce the number of kids that are bused, and boundaries are going to have to be strange.

Unless they move an option school there to fill excess seats and free up more neighborhood seats in areas with seat deficits.

Yes, but then you are still busing kids to the option school near the edge of the county. This is based on the assumption that large numbers of kids from other parts of the county will travel to a faraway option school. The data suggests that option schools draw heavily from nearby neighborhoods, so the problem of schools not being where they are needed isn't solved.

The county promised those neighbors around Reed that there wouldn’t be a handful of buses. I have no idea how those conversations went and if that’s just being nice to a neighborhood request or a real issue. I mean 13 buses plus special education buses are a lot and isn’t workable at every school site no matter how easy it would be as a solution. How old is the road and narrow. Does the school have a parking lot? Does it share a lot of near by parking with other needs (businesses or another school).

I know this is one of the reasons my neighborhood school would never make it this far in the consideration for an option site. Fewest parking spaces in the county and very shared and limited street parking. Can only accommodate 4 buses at the school lot at a time. Logistically and honesty safety it would never work. Drivers from the school next door are already careless and frustrated with the way the buses who have to wait for a special ed bus or other buses to pull out and just have to sit and block the entire road. Lots of close calls with high school drivers or grazing cars.
I can’t imagine if nearly 10 more buses were added.

Has APS transportation studied the difference in vehicle traffic at neighborhood schools versus option schools? I’m willing to bet the numbers are much closer than you think, since so many kids are individually driven to neighborhood schools versus a single bus bringing in 30 kids. People are always arguing certain sites can’t be option schools because of the traffic but neighborhood schools have a ton of traffic themselves.

[Anonymous]

I bet there are some neighborhood schools that can accommodate that but 13 buses is a lot. You can look at the site maps and see which ones have the lots to handle a large parent drop and a lot of buses plus the buses waiting to get in to the lot to drop. Regardless of how many option parents drive their kids they all use about 13 buses and the two in talks to move do use 13 plus 2 special education buses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Reed was built because there is a seat deficit in the county, along with a shortage of sites available to APS for building schools. They build where they can.

But if that's the case, APS can't expect to reduce the number of kids that are bused, and boundaries are going to have to be strange.

Unless they move an option school there to fill excess seats and free up more neighborhood seats in areas with seat deficits.

Yes, but then you are still busing kids to the option school near the edge of the county. This is based on the assumption that large numbers of kids from other parts of the county will travel to a faraway option school. The data suggests that option schools draw heavily from nearby neighborhoods, so the problem of schools not being where they are needed isn't solved.

The county promised those neighbors around Reed that there wouldn’t be a handful of buses. I have no idea how those conversations went and if that’s just being nice to a neighborhood request or a real issue. I mean 13 buses plus special education buses are a lot and isn’t workable at every school site no matter how easy it would be as a solution. How old is the road and narrow. Does the school have a parking lot? Does it share a lot of near by parking with other needs (businesses or another school).

I know this is one of the reasons my neighborhood school would never make it this far in the consideration for an option site. Fewest parking spaces in the county and very shared and limited street parking. Can only accommodate 4 buses at the school lot at a time. Logistically and honesty safety it would never work. Drivers from the school next door are already careless and frustrated with the way the buses who have to wait for a special ed bus or other buses to pull out and just have to sit and block the entire road. Lots of close calls with high school drivers or grazing cars.
I can’t imagine if nearly 10 more buses were added.

I was involved in the Reed planning. I don't think they "promised" anyone few buses, but they set that as the expectation because it is an extremely walkable school (if that's how they draw the boundaries to maximize this--the "no moves" scenario is less walkable because they have to send walkable units to fill up Tuckahoe/Nottingham/McKinley). There was concern about buses/traffic from the adjacent Westover businesses on Washington Boulevard. The bus drop off area is also limited because of how short that block is on McKinley between Washington Boulevard and Lexington (and the parent drop off is also on that block). I think a lot of buses would be challenging, although maybe it's normal to stack them into the surrounding residential streets (I don't know)?