The AJC reported yesterday morning that at the Decatur School Board’s Wednesday closed door executive session, it will work to identify land for new school sites.
With enrollment estimated to almost double by 2019, the post states that CSD believes it will need to construct one or two new schools to accomodate the growing student population.
And since many of you seem eager to offer up your opinions on where CSD should build new schools – based on comments in our threads regarding development and open space – here’s your chance to chime in, in a very non-official capacity.
Where in Decatur is land available for the City Schools to build new schools? Where might it make the most sense to build a new school in relation to other existing schools?
5th Avenue photo courtesy of Ann
i thought they should’ve used that DeVry property–seemed like a no-brainer…
I agree the DeVry spot seemed sent from above! But I will never understand the choices the Decatur school board makes.
From the AJC http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/county-by-county-news-for-tuesday/nXbgk/
Superintendent: DeVry property unavailable
Decatur schools superintendent Phyllis Edwards admitted the former DeVry University land in east Decatur is an “excellent location,” but added it’s not a current possibility for new school construction.
The 21-acre site was annexed into the city in 2009, but it’s still owned by DeVry and the $17.5 million cost is especially prohibitive, she said.
Also the property’s currently zoned for mixed-use development.
Decatur schools are projected to double enrollment by 2018 with virtually no available undeveloped land that would support school facilities. — Bill Banks for the AJC
Sorry, that article’s explanation just confuses me more. I’m no math genius, but seems like $17.5M to purchase that property, and then probably that much again to refurbish it for a new high school, would’ve been a smarter use of money than the projected $54M a new high school would cost (at least, that was the amount they quoted in that bond referendum that got put on the back burner last year). As for its current zoning, let’s be real here: the City can grant any variances it wishes, so changing it from mixed use wouldn’t have been a big deal. The way I heard it (caveat this, because it’s just hearsay) was that too many parents complained that putting a new high school there would’ve meant the majority of Decatur kids couldn’t walk to school anymore, so COD & CSD decided to leave that option off the table. I still think it was a mistake.
AT&T property at E. College & E. Lake
The Boys & Girls Club site is probably large enough. I am not necessarily saying CSD should build there, but the site itself would seem to fit many of our needs.
And I was only half kidding with my earlier idea of accepting a few residential annexation petitions and then immediately condemning the properties. The petitioners get a little more for their homes and we get much needed land. Win/win.
Are they talking about after the big annexation in the north? If so, they need to build new school somewhere over there. I’m really concerned how they are going to keep the quality of education up…sigh.
Agreed, it makes some hard choices for economics. The quality of the education should not be sacrificed, but what other service can be cut? Also, does anyone know why Decatur High School was unranked nationally in U.S. News – http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/georgia/districts/decatur-city/decatur-high-school-5830
While not surrounded by much housing, there’s a lot of underutilized land on Tally Street.
At present, but East Decatur Station is master planned for a whole lotta housing. I think this is where the greatest potential lies within our current boundaries — so long as CSD commits to an urban model school (comparable to many of our others) and not the suburban-friendly acreage recommendations from the state.
The property owners there have yet to file for a rezoning that would allow their plan to be built (right now it’s zoned C3, Heavy Commercial, which does not allow for housing), so perhaps there’s some leverage there for the city… dedicate (or otherwise work a deal) some land to a school and, in return, your entitlement process could go more smoothly.
With the development of the Avondale MARTA parking lot, this area could be very exciting. I’d love to see more connectivity to East Decatur Station from other streets. Perhaps AT&T could find another parking lot.
Seems like there is a lot of underutilized land over there with just a few cars, parking lots, etc etc. The Ace site.
Decatur Cemetery. Would have to make sure they don’t just move the headstones, though.
Is that what they mean by “Common Core”?
“Decatur Cemetery. Would have to make sure they don’t just move the headstones, though.”
No Dead Body Left Behind.
Walk to the light Carol Anne…
Are we only talking about elementary schools?
How about building a vertical school downtown using existing office buildings. What if it was an opt-in middle school or high school that focused on art or STEM or something and intentionally did not have athletics. Students could be on sports teams at the other schools since they would be so easy to walk to. They could figure something out for PE. (I see people doing boot camp in parking decks.) I know both Renfroe and the HS are set to expand, but will the expansions be big enough?
+1 on going vertical. I’ve always wondered what the building next to the Baby Kroger housed and if that could be converted. Not sure of the square footage of the building, but there is some underutilized land in the surrounding area. I bet the guy running the small dry cleaning shop would love to get a brand new space courtesy of CSD!
Not sure about this but I think there are safety regulations that limit the number of stories in an elementary school?
Re “What if it was an opt-in middle school or high school that focused on art or STEM or something and intentionally did not have athletics”
I think this is a really good idea. I know the whole IB thing wins us awards and helps academically strong students get into college and win scholarships, but with the increasing risk/cost of student debt, and the high jobless rate of college grads, a truly innovative solution would be to give “non-academic” kids modern, real world skills for the changing economy as part of their high school experience..
Some ideas to think about
– Foreign language/culture study for international jobs – china, korea, brazil, india (culture)
– Energy science and management
– computer science
– robotics (building & maintaining)
– user experience & product design
– small business management & entrepreneurship
I think some of these types of courses would better prepare our students than, for example, AP US History.
Nailed it. A school’s primary responsibility is to prepare children for success as an adult. Not everyone is a fit for a standard four-year university, and efforts should be made to legitimize “non-traditional” fields of study. You listed some excellent examples.
It also frustrates me when I see people dismiss trades, especially when I write those checks for plumbing repairs, tree trimming, and foundation stabilization. Somewhere along the line, we have been taught that going into a trade is demeaning, and that outlook is an insult to all the smart and talented people who choose them.
My favorite class in middle school? Shop.
This sounds really neat. I really like that you included foreign languages with the computer stuff; not every student who rejects, or is inappropriate for, the IB diploma is handy or a techie. The trick in devising “specialty” programs, whether it’s IB diploma or Career IB certificate (or whatever its called), or anything else, is to balance the need to have some requirements for such specialty programs with the need to avoid the negative aspects of tracking, especially labeling students too early. The problem is that some high school students are mature enough to be excited about the possibilities in front of them. Others are still in the toddler/adolescent “no” mode and reject anything presented to them in a positive light by adults. Others are just plain immature and clueless. Since adolescents are intensely focused on self-image, they can absorb unintended messages from tracking. There’s a world of difference between a freshman and a senior in high school and there should be room for the majority of high school students to zig and zag, take wrong turns, and experience enough that they find where they fit the best. A possibility would be the model of universities that allow students in one school open access to courses in the other schools and permit easy transfers midstream from one school to another.
And furthermore, if we are going to build new schools within the existing City of Decatur footprint, can we just scrap the annexation plan? I though needing land for schools was one of the reasons cited for annexation.
Annexation is also supposed to help increase the % of commercial properties (vs. residential and non-taxable like gov’t and colleges) in our tax digest above the current levels, because right now Decatur is residential-heavy. And increasing that % is supposed to help keep our schools viable long-term.
That’s what making some people complain about a Decatur “land grab,” because the proposed annexation, while it does include some surrounding residential too, is skewed toward commercial properties like Suburban Plaza.
Perhaps see if Agnes Scott would sell back some of their unused land. We live in Oakhurst and walk through there all the time, and it hardly seems like its overflowing with students.
“City Schools of Decatur/Avondale.”
Aristotle said it best: “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, y’all!”
Decaturdale for the win!!!
sounds like a fun avontur.
Asking as an interested newcomer: Has there ever been discussion among city and school officials of addressing the demand for school capacity instead of or along with capacity on its own? Would gradually inching up residential property taxes not at some point alleviate the massive enrollment increases currently forecast by simply cooling demand among families with children to squeeze into the city? I know it’s an essentially naive question, but I’m still curious if the notion has at least come up in these discussions.
In the vain of these things often work themselves out, one would think that inching up taxes would decrease demand. But, recent history in Decatur supports the opposite conclusion. As taxes go up, those without the direct benefit (i.e. kids in schools) leave and only those with school age children justify paying the high taxes. School overcrowding, on the other hand, will eventually decrease demand. But, if no one can sell at inflated prices b/c CSD is no longer as desirable, we are gonna have a huge problem.
Good point – I would also say that as the demand for residential property by school enrollment age ready families goes up, it creates an upward trend of property values and assessments, and thus should balance out over time if the balence of commercial properties is on par with out the need to increase the taxation rate.
I would ask if rather then the “land grab” If re-zoning or revitalizing commercial areas would be a better long term option for balencing funding. E College ave east of Commerce could be a nice extension of the city center with some investment.
I say no to increased taxes: my taxes already keep skyrocketing up, not inching up (thank you Dekalb County Appraisers)
The APS-owned East Lake elementary is two tenths of a mile across the city of Decatur line. It’s been shuttered. You can’t annex your way over there because it’s already City of Atlanta, but maybe work out a lease arrangement? Bonus points for having a haunted playground. Downside would be that it’s like half a mile from FAVE.
I know the topic is narrow (where to build new schools), but others have expanded it so here’s my two cents:
1. High School – the property is fairly large and has undeveloped capacity (I know about the garden, but maybe it moves), so expansion makes sense. Student parking capacity probably suffers.
2. Middle School – tougher call here. The lot is pretty small and will be swallowed whole at some point. Probably need to think about another MS. Maybe Methodist Children’s Home’s under-utilized property (if annexed)?
3. Elementary – here’s where some discussion centered around efficiency are needed. There are four able-bodied school buildings south of the tracks. Even with all the growth on that side of town, we should see if those students can’t be accommodated in a K-5 configuration in those four buildings. The ELC can be moved – maybe even to some leased space downtown (leasing provides flexibility – if this really is a bubble you can move ELC back to CH). That leaves the northside – I’m not sure how much expansion is possible, but seems like Westchester and maybe Glennwood too could grow a little. If a new school is needed, annexation will help because there is some vacant land up there. If no annexation, finding a location may be tough.
The K-5 configuration wasn’t mentioned until the 28th post in this thread. Most of the K-5ers must be distracted by the Google Fiber news this afternoon.
New schools, more schools, really going to need to be discussed in context of grade spans. I can stomach a huge middle school and high school I think. I find it harder to think about 1400 kids at the 4/5. We are going to have to see numbers run about how capacity would be impacted with different school configurations. One option considered long ago was k-4 with 5th going into middle school (though separated). Seems like worth looking at these issues before Renfroe construction finalized.
It does seem like if the enrollment does get that big there will be little benefit to have one 4-5 academy… but having two 4-5s would be strange. At that point it just maybe it would better to go back to K-5, but as my kids will be past elementary school by that point, I have no horse in this race.
I agree totally. One 4/5 or no 4/5s. Two is dumb.
A downside of the 4/5 from the beginning is that it’s less flexible if enrollment varies a lot over time. Two 4/5s makes no sense to me.
If they know they are faced with 3,000 new students, I would be highly surprised if there wasn’t an inkling of an idea yet, about where to put them. Why all the secrecy?
Public real estate evaluation skews market pricing. Better deals are had when sellers aren’t sure just how much their parcel is wanted.
I thought the purpose of the latest proposed annexation was to get the Children’s Home inside the city limits and use the open space in the back for a new high school.
Move the Methodist Church down to the Methodist Children’s Home property and build a school between Commerce, Ponce and N. Candler. That could give CSD the old sanctuary too.