Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which buildings are you thinking of that are currently for sale and don't have existing tenants?

Why do they have to buy the buildings? That would add to the time and capital cost. They would just need to lease full floors and ensure isolated access to the school floors (dedicated elevators). I'm not saying it's easy but it allows flexibility that traditional campuses don't allow. How long was Reed coming? Alternatively, why not comingle say a school and a library on different floors?

There are also plenty of examples of developers willing to give a building or land in order to get a right of way ect and they are always turned down. If there was a will there would be a way and building conversation whether it be office to modular units or schools are not as expensive as we think if we don't shoot for the stars over design issues like we tend to do. I think the real problem is parents unwilling to see their kids in an office building.

Such as?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which buildings are you thinking of that are currently for sale and don't have existing tenants?

Why do they have to buy the buildings? That would add to the time and capital cost. They would just need to lease full floors and ensure isolated access to the school floors (dedicated elevators). I'm not saying it's easy but it allows flexibility that traditional campuses don't allow. How long was Reed coming? Alternatively, why not comingle say a school and a library on different floors?

There are also plenty of examples of developers willing to give a building or land in order to get a right of way ect and they are always turned down. If there was a will there would be a way and building conversation whether it be office to modular units or schools are not as expensive as we think if we don't shoot for the stars over design issues like we tend to do. I think the real problem is parents unwilling to see their kids in an office building.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immersion should go to Carlin Springs. ATS should either be eliminated or go to Nottingham. Ashlawn's boundary should come over and take some of the current Carlin Springs PUs, maybe even some of Barcroft's CAFs. ATS as a neighborhood school can help balance Barrett and relieve McKinley.

Agree with at least some of this. N Arlington just doesn’t have the Spanish speaking students necessary to fill half of an immersion school. ATS will likely be eliminated in favor of an IB program, and the ATS site is not good for a neighborhood school as far as walking goes, so maybe IB will just go there. The IB kids can just tuck their shirts in until ATS is grandfathered out of the building.

N Arlington doesn't need the Spanish speakers to fill the program if the program is located more centrally - like at current ATS location.

What? It needs roughly half Spanish speakers. Those families probably aren’t going to choose a school that isn’t close, whether it’s key or ATS.

Why not?

Too far to walk? They like a school with lots of neighborhood kids?

Changing the Key location is going to be twice the headache that the swap was. If they choose Nottingham as the new location, the wrath of north Arlington will come out in full force. If they choose Carlin Springs, the boundary and capacity issues will be insane. We can all talk about ideal locations for different programs, but space shortages make it impossible to perfectly place everyone.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immersion should go to Carlin Springs. ATS should either be eliminated or go to Nottingham. Ashlawn's boundary should come over and take some of the current Carlin Springs PUs, maybe even some of Barcroft's CAFs. ATS as a neighborhood school can help balance Barrett and relieve McKinley.

Agree with at least some of this. N Arlington just doesn’t have the Spanish speaking students necessary to fill half of an immersion school. ATS will likely be eliminated in favor of an IB program, and the ATS site is not good for a neighborhood school as far as walking goes, so maybe IB will just go there. The IB kids can just tuck their shirts in until ATS is grandfathered out of the building.

N Arlington doesn't need the Spanish speakers to fill the program if the program is located more centrally - like at current ATS location.

What? It needs roughly half Spanish speakers. Those families probably aren’t going to choose a school that isn’t close, whether it’s key or ATS.

Why not?

The inconvenient truth is that Spanish speakers aren’t choosing immersion even if it is close. Claremont wasn’t exactly raking in the native speakers in the lottery either. They only filled 43/72 K spots in the lottery vs Key 35/72 K spots. For non native speakers the numbers were 182 and 114 for K. https://www.apsva.us/school-options/school-transfer-data-2/pre-k-elementary-options-transfers-application-data-school-year-2019-20/

The demand for immersion is coming from non Spanish speakers, so why not move one to Nottingham or wherever?

Tuckahoe can easily be swallowed up by McKinley, Reed & Nottingham. It's the obvious choice and has easy access via 66 and EFC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immersion should go to Carlin Springs. ATS should either be eliminated or go to Nottingham. Ashlawn's boundary should come over and take some of the current Carlin Springs PUs, maybe even some of Barcroft's CAFs. ATS as a neighborhood school can help balance Barrett and relieve McKinley.

Agree with at least some of this. N Arlington just doesn’t have the Spanish speaking students necessary to fill half of an immersion school. ATS will likely be eliminated in favor of an IB program, and the ATS site is not good for a neighborhood school as far as walking goes, so maybe IB will just go there. The IB kids can just tuck their shirts in until ATS is grandfathered out of the building.

N Arlington doesn't need the Spanish speakers to fill the program if the program is located more centrally - like at current ATS location.

What? It needs roughly half Spanish speakers. Those families probably aren’t going to choose a school that isn’t close, whether it’s key or ATS.

Why not?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immersion should go to Carlin Springs. ATS should either be eliminated or go to Nottingham. Ashlawn's boundary should come over and take some of the current Carlin Springs PUs, maybe even some of Barcroft's CAFs. ATS as a neighborhood school can help balance Barrett and relieve McKinley.

Agree with at least some of this. N Arlington just doesn’t have the Spanish speaking students necessary to fill half of an immersion school. ATS will likely be eliminated in favor of an IB program, and the ATS site is not good for a neighborhood school as far as walking goes, so maybe IB will just go there. The IB kids can just tuck their shirts in until ATS is grandfathered out of the building.

N Arlington doesn't need the Spanish speakers to fill the program if the program is located more centrally - like at current ATS location.

What? It needs roughly half Spanish speakers. Those families probably aren’t going to choose a school that isn’t close, whether it’s key or ATS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immersion should go to Carlin Springs. ATS should either be eliminated or go to Nottingham. Ashlawn's boundary should come over and take some of the current Carlin Springs PUs, maybe even some of Barcroft's CAFs. ATS as a neighborhood school can help balance Barrett and relieve McKinley.

ATS is a bad location for a neighborhood school, both because it’s not walkable given the roads, and because it’s too close to existing neighborhood seats (with Ashlawn and Reed and McKinley they don’t need another neighborhood school right here). Ashlawn’s tail will get scooped into ASFS or Key.

PP here. I agree that ATS is not walkable, but isn't the basic deal with Arlington that seats are needed in the middle? Certainly every time line drawing comes up, people point out that seats aren't needed in upper NW, nor were they apparently needed in the far south per the last boundary process. Also, you're assuming that boundaries can't cross Rt 50 but from a demographic perspective, that's exactly what they should start doing. The only relief most of South Arlington is going to get is to break up the western Pike CAFs. Splitting up the Carlin Springs zone is a good start, but Barcroft and Barrett are pretty heavily concentrated too. Ashlawn can't fix it all by itself, so I think the ATS solution would help there too. Compared to (1) seats available and (2) better demographic balance, seems to me that maximizing walk zone is a pretty distant 3rd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not immersion to ATS and ATS/IB to Reed? I don’t really want to give them a new building, but that program could certainly fill it.

That’s a decent idea

This really makes the most sense, so of course the school board won't choose it

Immersion at ATS doesn’t make sense. Some other option program at ATS does.

Yes, it does. Far more sense than any option program at Nottingham, Tuckahoe, or Discovery. ATS site can easily pull Spanish speakers from Barrett, Barcroft, Carlin Springs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Immersion should go to Carlin Springs. ATS should either be eliminated or go to Nottingham. Ashlawn's boundary should come over and take some of the current Carlin Springs PUs, maybe even some of Barcroft's CAFs. ATS as a neighborhood school can help balance Barrett and relieve McKinley.

Agree with at least some of this. N Arlington just doesn’t have the Spanish speaking students necessary to fill half of an immersion school. ATS will likely be eliminated in favor of an IB program, and the ATS site is not good for a neighborhood school as far as walking goes, so maybe IB will just go there. The IB kids can just tuck their shirts in until ATS is grandfathered out of the building.

N Arlington doesn't need the Spanish speakers to fill the program if the program is located more centrally - like at current ATS location.

Anonymous wrote:There is a va state restriction on schools spending money renovating buildings they don’t own which makes buying the building the only option

Sounds like something worthy of changing. Do you know the specific restriction so we could see if any bills to amend? A forever school campus is not nimble enough in the current environment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Instead of trailers, why not build in some empty and not fancy office space? Then it's flexible if they don't need the space in 5 years or not in that location.

There’s no such thing as inexpensive office space in Arlington. FFX could only do this for Bailey’s because the building was in foreclosure.

+1. And even then, they had to make it an upper school because it wouldn't have been code compliant for K-1 students without major renovations.

Exactly- this whole thing has nothing to do with balancing demographics

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why not immersion to ATS and ATS/IB to Reed? I don’t really want to give them a new building, but that program could certainly fill it.

That’s a decent idea

This really makes the most sense, so of course the school board won't choose it

Immersion at ATS doesn’t make sense. Some other option program at ATS does.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which buildings are you thinking of that are currently for sale and don't have existing tenants?

Why do they have to buy the buildings? That would add to the time and capital cost. They would just need to lease full floors and ensure isolated access to the school floors (dedicated elevators). I'm not saying it's easy but it allows flexibility that traditional campuses don't allow. How long was Reed coming? Alternatively, why not comingle say a school and a library on different floors?

There is a va state restriction on schools spending money renovating buildings they don’t own which makes buying the building the only option