What Should the 5th Avenue 4/5 Academy Look Like?
January 19, 2010 | 10:02 amLike anyone had to ask!
But seriously, here’s the opportunity many have been waiting for with bated breath. I just received this note from Assistant Superintendent Thomas Van Soelen…
The architect for the 4/5 Academy at Fifth Avenue will be available at several locations in the coming days to hear from community members regarding their ideas for the new building. All meetings are open to the public. Time to offer ideas will be created based on the number of speakers that wish to speak. If a community member would rather offer input electronically, the email address fifthavenue@csdecatur.net has been set up for that purpose.
- Jan 19 Glennwood SLT meeting 4 pm
- Jan 19 Clairemont SLT meeting 5:30 pm
- Jan 20 Winnona Park SLT meeting 6 pm
- Jan 20 Decatur High School Performing arts center 7:30 pm, designed for current 4/5 parents
- Jan 25 Oakhurst SLT meeting 4:15 pm
- Jan 25 Oakhurst Neighborhood Association 7 pm
Beach Volleyball Court! Beach Volleyball Court! Beach Volleyball Court! 
Oh, please no!
Design by committee? Do you really want to end up with a camel?
How about design by qualified design professionals? Sounds novel, huh?
See the McKoy Park pool as an example of design by committee. I
Or check out Decatur’s “new and improved” MARTA plaza, for proof of what happens to design when community input is lacking.
This pool isn’t nice? My kids like it.
Yeah, that comment confuses me too. Everyone I’ve ever talked to loves that pool, especially if they have toddlers.
It seems fine for the little ones, but my older kids hate it. It’s too small and is always really crowded. They say there’s not much room to play in. We are faithful Glenlake pool-goers. I love the extensive shallow end for my little ones and my older ones enjoy the rest of the pool.
What CSD Mom said.
It’s a pool that tried to be all things to all people instead of what most people want – a big square pool.
How about using a demographer to project enrollment, not a construction company? How about building a school that won’t be full to capacity in its second year of operation? I certainly agree that design by committee is a terrible idea and gives the false impression that the community input is just as valuable as that of a professional, but this non-professional can very easily determine that 22 of the 24 proposed classrooms will be full by the time the K & 1st grade students occupy the building. That is based upon the number of K & 1st students already enrolled in CSD.
So, that leaves two spaces for ESS, Links, computer/science lab and other really cool state-of-the art concepts we’d like to put into place. I’m not certain what the PK enrollment is in CSD and the private preschools in the area, but it would most certainly not be a difficult number to determine. For the most part, the kids who will attend 5th Ave for its first 6 years of operation are already born and living in Decatur.
What is so difficult about making sure the building will house these kids and all the extras we need space for? If I can figure this out, I feel certain that a professional could. So, why aren’t they?
I don’t see this as design by committee but as a chance for CSD to get valuable feedback from its main stakeholders (after the children of course)–parents and taxpayers. If many folks say that they would like playground equipment and such equipment has been recommended as developmentally appropriate by expert groups, then CSD should either strongly consider it in the plans or articulate a good reason why not. If no one mentions playground equipment, then it’s not an issue. Ditto for computer/science lab, space for ESS and Links, auditorium, whatever.
Getting feedback from stakeholders is a fairly basic step in planning.
So what would people like to see that they think might not be in the plans otherwise? I’d like to see what others think since it never even occurred to me that a playground wasn’t an automatic feature of an elementary school that houses 9-11 year olds.
My top three would be:
- Playground equipment
- Adequate space for ESS, especially the severely mentally challenged since I know that’s been a toughie in the past.
- An auditorium or other common space where the whole school community could have an assembly.
DM, while beach volleyball is fun for adults and teens, it often is not for younger children (i.e. the 9-11 year olds that will be at 5th Avenue). Even sixth graders have a hard time playing volleyball (I know.. I once had one on the volleyball team).
I’d like sand volleyball courts… but not at a school for young kids. A playground would be a more age appropriate use for the space…. and a playground is no given at 5th avenue at this point.
But… again.. by all means.. let’s put sand volleyball somewhere!
Well, I find it useful to have a chance to indicate preferences. But it’s hard to indicate preferences when one doesn’t know enough to know what’s been left out. I never would have thought that developmentally appropriate playground equipment was optional for an elementary school housing 9-11 year olds.
I’d like to know what else folks think is needed. Here’s my priorities in the approximate order of preference. If CSD is already planning them, all the better.
- Developmentally appropriate playground equipment
- Common space, e.g. auditorium, that can hold all-school assemblies, performances, etc.
- Adequate space for ESS; space has been tight up to now for the severely mentally or emotionally challenged
- Science/computer lab
What else?
I was also wondering about the auditorium or cafetorium. I certainly hope there will be a space for assemblies. Right now there’s no place for all of Glennwood to come together.
Aside from programming and playground needs, Dr Edwards and several board members acknowledged another important point last week: the 4/5 Academy should be as “flexible” as possible, meaning that it should be built to accommodate other grade spans.
During the school board meeting, CSD disclosed that the conceptual plan calls for classroom sizes of 660 square-feet. Georgia’s minimum requirement for a K-3 classroom is 750 square-feet (and a sink). In light of enrollment trends (and potential annexation), all seemed to agree that we should be trying to plan for the possibility of 5th Ave’s being repurposed as a K-3.
How I love me some polarization.
CSD doesn’t do enough publicly to respond to residents and they cry “Foul!” CSD reaches out to the community and residents cry “Foul!”
The criticism here about “design by committee” assumes the school system will bend over backwards to fulfill every design request submitted by residents. What happened to the “have faith in CSD” mantra of the “let 5th Ave be” crowd from last week? As in, have faith that CSD will seek community input but not scuttle the whole thing in the process?
I’d argue that the best chance at designing and building a functional school that also caters to the unique demands of a community comes when your school system asks for input, but then leaves it to the pros to determine what works and what doesn’t.
CSD is still on the path to make that happen, so I don’t see what all the fuss is about.
I don’t either. I think your readers just enjoy complaining.
What else do we have to do all day? Work?
Hell no.
I’m sure I’m the only one who cares about this, but I wouldn’t classify my READERS as liking to “complain”. (BTW…what’s the difference between arguing and complaining?)
There are thousands of daily/weekly/monthly unique “readers”, and how many frequent commenters? 50-75?
“Engaging” is the euphemism I like. Remember that bad things happen once the community stops engaging in something. It may seem like a relief at first to those in charge but it may be the harbinger of apathy, disinterest, and less support.
Have I been insulted or am I just sensitive?
Thanks for sticking up for your regular commenters. One man’s complaining is another’s objective criticism. After all, this is a community blog.
Jeez Louise. Heaping ridicule on the perils of design by committee is not only reasonable, it should be considered everyone’s civic duty. But that doesn’t mean people shouldn’t have a voice in the 5th Avenue design. It’s more a matter of semantics.
CSD doesn’t need any help with the design, per se. What they need is help with the requirements (i.e. not design input such as “it needs a 25 foot play structure between the atrium and the cafeteria” but requirements input such as “it needs to accommodate the play needs of 9-12 year olds” or, instead of “the parking lot should be in the southwest corner”, something like “parking for staff and visitors needs to be accommodated.”).
Designers solve problems. It’s up to the community, in part, to articulate what the problems are.
I guess that’s my point. People got riled up when they assumed it was “design by committee”. No one has stated it would be.
Nice comment Scott,
I agree that it is appropriate for the whole Decatur community to provide input and let the professionals do the best they can to address concerns. I also think CSD and the Board are doing their best to keep the lines of communication open. Sue Simpson and a representative from the architect firm took comments and suggestions at both Glennwood and Clairemont last night. They seemed to be open everything at the Clairemont session. However, they will be working within the constraints of a fairly tight budget and not able to incorporate every wish and desire. I’m hopeful that the remaining sessions will allow for more positive input and that they will be able to build a school that will serve all of Decatur now and in the future.
Agree that the input sessions run by the SLTs but staffed by the experts worked really well. They are a great model.