Anonymous wrote:So, I'm not trying to be a jerk, but as a resident of the 22204 for over a decade now, I have become a cynic. It has become very clear that they will tell you about all the wonderful things that can be done in order to pass whatever the agenda du jour is, and then do none of those wonderful things. It is what it is. If you were expecting it to be different this time, well, now you know. Don't get fooled again.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’ve been following relatively closely but am confused by one thing. When the SB announced the hybrid solution — which I agree 100% was/is stupid, poorly thought out, and poorly articulated, and that Kenmore was/is the right choice for a 4th comprehensive HS — I read it entirely as choice seats for the CC site. I recall the presentation saying something about needing to settle on the educational focus, or whatever the lingo, for those seats. Fast forward 9 months or so, the neighborhoods in question are now rejecting inferior neighborhood seats (fair) *but also* rejecting additional choice seats. So how are we to read this as anything other than the neighborhoods making a grab for their own 4th comprehensive HS (which was basically already rejected as an option by the SB last year) and then throwing a hissy fit when they’re told that isn’t going to happen? Am I misremembering how we got here? Again, I completely and totally agree that this sucks and is stupid, but I don’t see how these neighborhoods truly expected some other outcome. Arl Heights poster and others in the know, what’s the answer?

And please, I’m on the 22204 list serve and am by now familiar with the talking points. Yes, it’s unfair to have inferior neighborhood seats. Yes, no other site has so many choice seats. I’m trying to figure out if I’m really missing information, or if the advocates have just wholly bought into their own spin.

This is exactly how I remember it, too. All along they have said they can't put the equivalent amenities on the site, which was why they said the seats were TBD, focus decided later. Frankly, that is asinine. Who just plops a school down at a site and then decides what the focus should be after the fact? Should t the site itself dictate what the optimal focus would be? But, I digress.

The neighborhood kept on with the drum beat of "neighborhood seats," so what staff and the SB heard was, "yes, we understand the site and financial limitations and we accept whatever you put here, as long as they are neighborhood seats." Y'all were misled, but not by APS. They also didn't promise you that the Henry boundary would not change when the school moved to a new physical location. Again, you're hearing what you want to hear and not hearing what they are actually saying.

Arl Heights poster again. The "all along they have said they can't put the equivalent amenities" is NOT true. The architects showed us 6 to 8 story buildings with a gymnasium, auditorium, pool--everything--within the footprint of the building. All that was left was outside space. The 6 to 8 story building would take up about 4 acres, leaving 8 acres for open space. This is what we were told, and in hindsight, with the intent to get community buy-in.

Fast forward to today. Now we are told: can't move Henry, can't move Community High School, can't move any CTE programs, can't move the daycare. Okay, then. Why they thought with so many competing interests on that small piece of land that they could do anything with it is beyond me. BTW, this is all stuff we learned along the process.

And again, we NEVER said we accept whatever you put here. NEVER. Please stop spreading that lie.

I'll leave your Henry boundary stuff for another post.

THAT's not true. Per the CCWG charge, all programs on the site in 2019 were to remain "at least through 2022." So, it is misleading to say that they changed their tune and recently started to say those things can't be moved. As someone who has been at almost all of the CCWG meetings, I never once heard the architects say they could fit ALL amenities on the site - there was ALWAYS discussion of at least some being off-site. This is not stuff learned along the process - perhaps for you; but not for those who were listening at the beginning. And even if all the amenities in totem could fit on the parcel, the funding isn't currently there to make it happen.

Anonymous wrote:So i was looking at the input on engage and saw a great suggestion to convert gunston to a highschool and put a middle school at career center. Has that been suggested or looked at seriously at all?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county just released it's proposed CIP (they're at the beginning of the process that we're moving toward the end of). I haven't read the whole thing, but what I've read so far appears to say the county is punting on any interim uses of the VHC property for the next ten years and on developing long-term plans for the site due to lack of funds. Seems like a prime opportunity to work out a deal with APS for APS to develop that site as a fourth neighborhood high school instead of the Career Center.

Well then what was the point of jfac?
They studied it and decided it had other more pressing purposes for it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The county just released it's proposed CIP (they're at the beginning of the process that we're moving toward the end of). I haven't read the whole thing, but what I've read so far appears to say the county is punting on any interim uses of the VHC property for the next ten years and on developing long-term plans for the site due to lack of funds. Seems like a prime opportunity to work out a deal with APS for APS to develop that site as a fourth neighborhood high school instead of the Career Center.

Well then what was the point of jfac?
They studied it and decided it had other more pressing purposes for it.

Anonymous wrote:I wish they would revisit the Kenmore site. Glencsrlyn needs to get a grip. It's the only site large enough for a 4th comprehensive high school and that is what is needed here.

If Fairfax has issues with the egress then Arlington needs to find a way to sweeten the deal to make it happen. There must be something they would want in return for cooperation on this. We have sent kids to Kenmore and are zoned for W-L and we would be delighted to have a full new high school in walking distance and would gladly send our kids there.

Anonymous wrote:The county just released it's proposed CIP (they're at the beginning of the process that we're moving toward the end of). I haven't read the whole thing, but what I've read so far appears to say the county is punting on any interim uses of the VHC property for the next ten years and on developing long-term plans for the site due to lack of funds. Seems like a prime opportunity to work out a deal with APS for APS to develop that site as a fourth neighborhood high school instead of the Career Center.

Anonymous wrote:

Can someone help me make sense of their position. If you look at the 10 year projections, the school that will bear the disproportionate burden of the overcrowding in the next 10 years is Wakefield. This position of “if you don’t build us a full high school at the cost of $250 million, then build nothing” seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face. Wakefield will be 1000 students over capacity. The students least likely to be able to opt out for private school. This whole campaign seems ill-advised to me.

At the time the discussion began the options were:

1. overcrowded Wakefield,

2. terrible traffic in your neighborhood, no parking on your streets ever again, and eventually being forced to send your kid to a crap school with no amenities when no one else choices into the crap school with no amenities (and the writing was already on the wall regarding Arlington Tech at this point)

3. Neighborhood school (so alleviate parking and traffic issues) with equal opportunities for your kids - what would you advocate for? Be honest? There is only one right answer there.

Now it appears the options are:

1. overcrowded Wakefield,

2. terrible traffic in your neighborhood, no parking on your streets ever again, and eventually being forced to send your kid to a crap school with no amenities when no one else choices into the crap school with no amenities

3. Neighborhood school with no parking (so no parking on your streets every again) and your kids sits in a refurbished elementary school and may not even have the option of taking any arts electives in high school (band, choir, theatre and art require specialty rooms that may not be built), may not get to be on a sports team, be in a band or in the school play, and your kid loses instruction time sitting on a bus to go for a mandatory swim at Long Branch. And the program's unproven so you don't even know if your kids will have a fair shot at good colleges, not that they would have been competitive with their complete lack of extracurriculars anyway.

Again. What would you choose? Again there is only one right answer. Every move the neighborhood made was rational given the options available at the time.

So here's the thing about successful choice schools - you have to know the focus of the school, then design the space around it. By saying that they were just going to slap a story on top of a dilapidated building to build some generic classrooms and then figure out a choice specialty later APS tipped their hand that it was never really gonna be a choice school. Cause a performing arts choice school requires very specific room set-ups. And they weren't talking about building theaters and rehearsal rooms. A really good STEM school requires science labs and robotics labs. They weren't talking about building those either. APS signaled in the very beginning that they were going to try to build the cheapest most undesirable thing they could get away with so the neighborhood fought for what they could get. You'd do the same

Anonymous wrote:Well, I guess that is the disconnect then. I mean, they certainly strung us along by asking for private meetings, forming the working group (which in hindsight was totally unnecessary), and telling us privately that there was space for everything except baseball/softball diamonds. They certainly got a lot of us supporting them and trying to get the neighborhood behind it. And believe me, it's much easier to get a group of people to oppose something, rather than support something.

I also hear the Wakefield thing quite a lot, and it makes me sad. My kids aren't old enough yet, but the neighborhood kids who go there love it. Again, another reason to have been a NIMBY all along. And most of you won't believe me anyway.


THIS! I live in Penrose. I'm sure none of you who are remembering things a certain way didn't go to the private meeting that Reid and Barbara had with the Columbia Pike neighborhoods to discuss our Career Center options. (NVD and Monique also unofficially attended). Well, it was a doozy. Words were thrown out like "Crown Jewel of Columbia Pike", and "urban high school". A lot of talk was about phasing and how we can make that work. Buying the ECDC building or using their parking was also discussed. It made me excited for the students who would be able to go there.

Fast forward a year and we are basically are being asked to accept a substandard school.

No thanks.