Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bethesda Elementary, an overcrowded feeder school for BCC, is adding yet another portable for the 2019-2020 school year. They're installing it today along Wilson Lane. This is after a major addition in 2015 that the school immediately outgrew. There are now three portables plus the addition. The kids now eat lunch in 20 minute shifts starting at 10:45 am (roughly). Whatever happens with a new high school, the rate of additions at feeder schools that will absolutely end up at BCC and Whitman--regardless of boundary studies--will mean continued overcrowding. No matter what County Council tells you, this is due to their rubber stamp approach to new multifamily construction in and around downtown Bethesda without a realistic corresponding building strategy for new schools. They equivocated their way around this by claiming that new apartments and condos wouldn't generate new kids--they'd be bought / rented by "young millennials and seniors who wanted to downsize." The County knew it couldn't afford to build the school infrastructure required for the buildings going in, so they just kicked the can down the road. This will (and already is) leading parents to realize that down-County public schools are in big trouble, and aren't worth the home prices or the tax bills.

The County Council is not responsible for a building strategy for new schools.

Also, nobody in Montgomery County, ever, has said that the new apartments and condos won't have children in them.

Also, at least since 1950, school-building in Montgomery County has lagged behind population growth.

From Section 2.8.4 of the approved Bethesda Downtown Plan, which was approved by County Council on May 26th, 2017:

"In addition, the Sector Plan provides for a net total
of up to 8,456 new multi-family high-rise housing
units. Based on student generation for this area
of the county, Montgomery County Public Schools
(MCPS) estimates at full build-out, the new housing
would result in approximately 355 elementary school
students, 145 middle school students and 195 high
school students. Build-out of the Plan requires
redevelopment of many properties and is estimated
to take 20 to 30 years. Some properties identified for
more housing units may not redevelop at all during the
life of the Plan."

This would assume that the average condo / apt unit has .08 students. That means, if you walk down a hall with a dozen apartments, you'd find one kid between 5 and 18. Does this seem reasonable, on its face? Oh by the way, the Board of Education basically told the PB / CC that its numbers were too low (they estimated 405 / 170 / 220), and they didn't change them, because... hey whatever, we'll take the tax $$$. But even assuming those numbers are correct, BCC will already be over capacity in 2021/2022 with the new addition and without the building spree even beginning to "generate" new students--and the PB / CC and B of E admit they have nowhere to put a new high school. And oh yes, I agree--the tear downs are also generating new students at very high rates. There's literally nowhere to go.

Furthermore, when the Planning Board drones on about these multifamily buildings not being attractive to families, they are directly contradicting their own mission statement: "Concentrate most new housing near public transportation and provide easy, multi-modal connections to jobs, schools, shopping, recreation, and other leisure activities."

The point is, this whole thing is a slow-motion trainwreck that CC / PB have known about for years and have been utterly negligent in planning for. They are critical partners for the B of E... at least they should be... and they've been negligent.

Anonymous wrote:Bethesda Elementary, an overcrowded feeder school for BCC, is adding yet another portable for the 2019-2020 school year. They're installing it today along Wilson Lane. This is after a major addition in 2015 that the school immediately outgrew. There are now three portables plus the addition. The kids now eat lunch in 20 minute shifts starting at 10:45 am (roughly). Whatever happens with a new high school, the rate of additions at feeder schools that will absolutely end up at BCC and Whitman--regardless of boundary studies--will mean continued overcrowding. No matter what County Council tells you, this is due to their rubber stamp approach to new multifamily construction in and around downtown Bethesda without a realistic corresponding building strategy for new schools. They equivocated their way around this by claiming that new apartments and condos wouldn't generate new kids--they'd be bought / rented by "young millennials and seniors who wanted to downsize." The County knew it couldn't afford to build the school infrastructure required for the buildings going in, so they just kicked the can down the road. This will (and already is) leading parents to realize that down-County public schools are in big trouble, and aren't worth the home prices or the tax bills.

+1. I would also add that it’s not just multi-family housing that’s the issue here. The rate of tear-downs of single family dwellings in this area is unbelievable. The old homes are most often occupied by seniors and the new ones in their place house families with multiple children. The school infrastructure cannot support the current rate of housing development across the board.

Nobody is getting into Woodward as a high school (not a holding school) for at least 4 more years, probably longer.

Anonymous wrote:Bethesda Elementary, an overcrowded feeder school for BCC, is adding yet another portable for the 2019-2020 school year. They're installing it today along Wilson Lane. This is after a major addition in 2015 that the school immediately outgrew. There are now three portables plus the addition. The kids now eat lunch in 20 minute shifts starting at 10:45 am (roughly). Whatever happens with a new high school, the rate of additions at feeder schools that will absolutely end up at BCC and Whitman--regardless of boundary studies--will mean continued overcrowding. No matter what County Council tells you, this is due to their rubber stamp approach to new multifamily construction in and around downtown Bethesda without a realistic corresponding building strategy for new schools. They equivocated their way around this by claiming that new apartments and condos wouldn't generate new kids--they'd be bought / rented by "young millennials and seniors who wanted to downsize." The County knew it couldn't afford to build the school infrastructure required for the buildings going in, so they just kicked the can down the road. This will (and already is) leading parents to realize that down-County public schools are in big trouble, and aren't worth the home prices or the tax bills.

The County Council is not responsible for a building strategy for new schools.

Also, nobody in Montgomery County, ever, has said that the new apartments and condos won't have children in them.

Also, at least since 1950, school-building in Montgomery County has lagged behind population growth.

Anonymous wrote:BCC will definitely be less crowded since many of the students on its northern boundary will end up at Woodward.

Also, the moon is made of green cheese.

BCC will definitely be less crowded since many of the students on its northern boundary will end up at Woodward.

Bethesda Elementary, an overcrowded feeder school for BCC, is adding yet another portable for the 2019-2020 school year. They're installing it today along Wilson Lane. This is after a major addition in 2015 that the school immediately outgrew. There are now three portables plus the addition. The kids now eat lunch in 20 minute shifts starting at 10:45 am (roughly). Whatever happens with a new high school, the rate of additions at feeder schools that will absolutely end up at BCC and Whitman--regardless of boundary studies--will mean continued overcrowding. No matter what County Council tells you, this is due to their rubber stamp approach to new multifamily construction in and around downtown Bethesda without a realistic corresponding building strategy for new schools. They equivocated their way around this by claiming that new apartments and condos wouldn't generate new kids--they'd be bought / rented by "young millennials and seniors who wanted to downsize." The County knew it couldn't afford to build the school infrastructure required for the buildings going in, so they just kicked the can down the road. This will (and already is) leading parents to realize that down-County public schools are in big trouble, and aren't worth the home prices or the tax bills.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not when the base structure cannot support building up. And, as mentioned previously, capacity always takes priority over modernization, because of safety. Just ask the Fire Marshall. And, it is not an either or proposition! Schools should be safe (not overcrowded) and modern. MC is supposedly one of the wealthiest in the country - why can't we all advocate for both?

OK, then you build a new building. The point is that it's not site limitations, it's money limitations.

It's really both. And anyway the master plan is to add on to a neighboring school which has room for another addition (Whitman), then move some students there, rather than to build a new and taller building on a small site.

Which master plan? MCPS does not have to abide by county master plans.

It's referenced in the Lyttonsville and Westbard master plans, quoted earlier in this thread. Of course MCPS doesn't have to abide by master plans. But it gives a sense of the conversations that have been happening.

The Lyttonsville sector plan (May 2017) says: "For the B-CC this analysis shows that the cluster will have sufficient capacity at buildout at the ES and MS levels, but that B-CC HS will be well over capacity. The analysis for the Westbard Sector Plan examined both the Whitman and B-CC Clusters and concluded that Whitman HS could have a second addition beyond the additional already programmed in the CIP, and with that second addition there would be sufficient capacity at the HS level across the Whitman and B-CC Clusters."

Not sure what sense of conversations that gives, but ok, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not when the base structure cannot support building up. And, as mentioned previously, capacity always takes priority over modernization, because of safety. Just ask the Fire Marshall. And, it is not an either or proposition! Schools should be safe (not overcrowded) and modern. MC is supposedly one of the wealthiest in the country - why can't we all advocate for both?

OK, then you build a new building. The point is that it's not site limitations, it's money limitations.

It's really both. And anyway the master plan is to add on to a neighboring school which has room for another addition (Whitman), then move some students there, rather than to build a new and taller building on a small site.

Which master plan? MCPS does not have to abide by county master plans.

It's referenced in the Lyttonsville and Westbard master plans, quoted earlier in this thread. Of course MCPS doesn't have to abide by master plans. But it gives a sense of the conversations that have been happening.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of BCC will likely end up at Woodward. There is a joint capacity study with WJ and BCC at the ES level right now. Whitman is getting an addition and while BCC is just finishing theirs, they will be overcrowded again soon, and there is no more space to add more classrooms. Plus, in one of the master plans in a BCC area, it says Woodward will relieve overcrowding. Meanwhile, Woodward will likely be overcapacity by the time it opens (or shortly thereafter).

People on DCUM keep asserting that, with no basis in actual reality.

^^^ This. Big nope on that one. The PP who said the last edition has maxed out the site is correct though.

Actually BCC was included in the original Woodward discussion. I don't think you're out of the woods.

Which discussion was "the original Woodward discussion"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of BCC will likely end up at Woodward. There is a joint capacity study with WJ and BCC at the ES level right now. Whitman is getting an addition and while BCC is just finishing theirs, they will be overcrowded again soon, and there is no more space to add more classrooms. Plus, in one of the master plans in a BCC area, it says Woodward will relieve overcrowding. Meanwhile, Woodward will likely be overcapacity by the time it opens (or shortly thereafter).

People on DCUM keep asserting that, with no basis in actual reality.

^^^ This. Big nope on that one. The PP who said the last edition has maxed out the site is correct though.

Actually BCC was included in the original Woodward discussion. I don't think you're out of the woods.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not when the base structure cannot support building up. And, as mentioned previously, capacity always takes priority over modernization, because of safety. Just ask the Fire Marshall. And, it is not an either or proposition! Schools should be safe (not overcrowded) and modern. MC is supposedly one of the wealthiest in the country - why can't we all advocate for both?

OK, then you build a new building. The point is that it's not site limitations, it's money limitations.

It's really both. And anyway the master plan is to add on to a neighboring school which has room for another addition (Whitman), then move some students there, rather than to build a new and taller building on a small site.

Can you point to a citation for this? We are probably the most likely ES (or portion of an ES) to be impacted if that comes to pass. And that will make for some very unhappy kids.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not when the base structure cannot support building up. And, as mentioned previously, capacity always takes priority over modernization, because of safety. Just ask the Fire Marshall. And, it is not an either or proposition! Schools should be safe (not overcrowded) and modern. MC is supposedly one of the wealthiest in the country - why can't we all advocate for both?

OK, then you build a new building. The point is that it's not site limitations, it's money limitations.

It's really both. And anyway the master plan is to add on to a neighboring school which has room for another addition (Whitman), then move some students there, rather than to build a new and taller building on a small site.

Which master plan? MCPS does not have to abide by county master plans.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not when the base structure cannot support building up. And, as mentioned previously, capacity always takes priority over modernization, because of safety. Just ask the Fire Marshall. And, it is not an either or proposition! Schools should be safe (not overcrowded) and modern. MC is supposedly one of the wealthiest in the country - why can't we all advocate for both?

OK, then you build a new building. The point is that it's not site limitations, it's money limitations.

It's really both. And anyway the master plan is to add on to a neighboring school which has room for another addition (Whitman), then move some students there, rather than to build a new and taller building on a small site.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:BCC keeps getting additions and add ons. Some of the DCC are horrible and badly in need or repairs.

Call MCPS and ask for numbers, and stop fueling hate for Bethesda.

No one is hating Bethesda. However, there are schools in really poor condition that need to be torn down and rehabbed like BCC and Whitman get. To demand that BCC gets another expansion when other kids are going to overcrowded school in poor conditions is far more a priority. We all pay taxes. Why should one area get their schools updated and remodeled and not others.

Our elementary school has things like gutters falling down, sheds that need to be replaced or at least repaired. You are been really selfish. If overcrowding is an issue for you, send your child to private or move.

Yeah, but not as much.