Anonymous wrote:Yes a 4000 seat WL is a terrible idea, but so what? It's a problem of our own making. Everyone is squeezing in bounds for it and no one wants to be moved out. Add to that parents wanting access to metro, and here we are.
We had an opportunity to have better transit in other parts of the county and no one wanted to pay for it.
Did no one consider that it might be a good idea to draw middle class families elsewhere?
We've concentrated poverty, so we have schools that no middle class families will consider. We created an uncrossable imaginary line at route 50.
No sympathy for WL and McKinley. No one forces people to perpetuate this cycle and this is the logical consequence of our collective behavior.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?
They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.
ok. but it's also close to the students right?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?
They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.
ok. but it's also close to the students right?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?
They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?
They want to put them at the Ed Center because they own the property and can leverage all the resources at W-L.
Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?
There is growth in both North and South. Gunston is not far behind Williamsburg and Swanson in overcrowding. The Kenmore site is fairly centrally coated so could serve well for either/both North and South.
Anonymous wrote:But the growth is concentrated in the north right? Isn't that why SB wants to put 1,300 seats in Ed Ctr to be closer to where the growing student population is?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The School Board has proposed it as a neighborhood school. There is a $150 million budget. Is that not enough to allow for construction of a pool, etc.?
Apparently not. Also, you can't build a full HS while the other two schools are still on the site. They have to be moved first or there isn't space for all the fields. That's my understanding.
My take from the discussion is that the ES would not be moved but the MS would in order to expand the HS into the existing building. They could build 1300 on the site now (presumably on the Kenmore parking lot) to preserve the fields. It currently has sufficient field space for a HS, although not a football stadium. But, sharing those fields between the existing MS plus an added HS would be challenging. The fields there are already heavily used between the MS, ES, and non-school sports leagues.
But they could figure it out. The fields at the other 3 schools could be used, as well.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The School Board has proposed it as a neighborhood school. There is a $150 million budget. Is that not enough to allow for construction of a pool, etc.?
Apparently not. Also, you can't build a full HS while the other two schools are still on the site. They have to be moved first or there isn't space for all the fields. That's my understanding.
My take from the discussion is that the ES would not be moved but the MS would in order to expand the HS into the existing building. They could build 1300 on the site now (presumably on the Kenmore parking lot) to preserve the fields. It currently has sufficient field space for a HS, although not a football stadium. But, sharing those fields between the existing MS plus an added HS would be challenging. The fields there are already heavily used between the MS, ES, and non-school sports leagues.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The School Board has proposed it as a neighborhood school. There is a $150 million budget. Is that not enough to allow for construction of a pool, etc.?
Apparently not. Also, you can't build a full HS while the other two schools are still on the site. They have to be moved first or there isn't space for all the fields. That's my understanding.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The School Board has proposed it as a neighborhood school. There is a $150 million budget. Is that not enough to allow for construction of a pool, etc.?
Falls Church City proposed a 1500 seat $117M brand new high school option that also included administrative office space. We can definitely do more than just 1300 seats with $147M.