I guess this is the only thing we’re talking about today. Three more maps showing K-3 rezoning options now on the CSD website HERE.
Above is map 7. Also note that when you open the map PDF’s, you’ll find stats at the bottom of the page for each zone option on the map, including capacity, enrollment, etc.
Latest from Decaturish
Parker Cross
Stu
Randy B.
FM Fats
smalltowngal
brianc
ant1
Trixie in Dixie
FM Fats
Captain Spaulding
Dax
ant1
ant1
Jeff
Wacky Sitcom Neighbo…
Option 7 is not bad, except for the diversity balances at Glennwood at and Westchester.
It also does not keep all neighborhoods going to walkable schools. Big hopes we can achieve this. In version 5 and 7 our entire neighborhood cannot walk.
Right now, the parts of Oakhurst at Winona can’t really walk. They have to cross Candler and McDonough and it’s a bit of a trek for little legs at rush hour. In map 7, MAK at Winona will have the same problem. At some point, just like diversity, there will have to be some sort of give and someone will have to lose something. The maps have to be drawn in a way that reflects the most flexibility for growth. Keeping Oakhurst and WP neighborhoods intact and not having northside kids coming south for k-3 lessens the southside burden.
4th and 5th graders from the northside can’t walk.
Actually, we live in MAK and have been walking to WP for two years with no problems. Our daughter is in 1st grade now and loves walking. We walk down Dougherty through Agnes Scott, which is a beautiful campus, then down Avery…no problems. Our two Crossing Guards are awesome and keep us safe!
For some reason I thought all of MAK was zoned to Oakhurst. But I don’t know how to read a map, so that might explain it.
Nope! MAK is WP, but we have been switched back and forth so many times that it is hard to keep track. Even the poor note taker at the public meeting dictated my comment in the inverse because she thought we were at Oakhurst currently. From MAK to WP, it is a straight shot through Agnes Scott with crossing guards at McDonough and Candler. Dougherty lines up almost perfectly with Winnona Drive. I can see that WP could be more challenging for folks further south, though.
Wait a minute, now. Does anyone really care where the MAK kids go for elementary school? They’re the lucky ones who get to go to middle school two blocks from their house. I say zone them in Westchester and spread the misery!
[Still, so so very glad that I don't have kids and can laugh at all the people who do!]
I think you are right. MAK kids should get no say because they hog the middle school.
Ha! Well, at the rate things are going, by the time my kids are in middle school, they’ll move it to Westchester. Or DeVry.
The MAK kids may get to wake up at 8:15 AM and walk to Renfroe by 8:40 AM but their parents will have to deal with the renovation of Renfroe in the middle of their neighborhood for many months. No one gets off scot-free from CSD space issues for long!
I have had kids at Oakhurst and Winnona. Both schools are excellent, but Oakhurst is better IMO, especially as far a school culture. Just letting you know that it wouldn’t be all bad to end up at Oakhurst.
Right now many Oakhurst kids walk to WP and Lenox Placers cross to Oakhurst. These are walkable distances with guards in place that have helped build a wonderful and safe walking community. These changes would more than double our current distance making it impossible to walk. It is one thing for some folks to have to give here and there, another to have an entire neighborhood no longer have a neighborhood school.
We are not advocating for anyone else to have to lose walkability, just to continue walking as we have been, and believe there are plenty of ways to achieve this. The fact that many (including our neighborhood) cannot walk to 4/5 does not somehow equal justify taking away walkability at the elementary school level as well.
Well, I know a whole bunch of families that don’t find Winona walkable in Oakhurst.
I am not sure why that would be unless they simply choose not to as they find it inconvenient. If that is the case they will likely find walking to Oakhurst inconvenient as well as those farthest from WP that are zoned for WP on the the Oakhurst side are about the same walking distance to Oakhurst.
Each family can make their own decision on if to walk or drive and what is realistic for their schedules. Many who are at WP want to stay there, including MAK who have said many of them walk. They have about the same walk that we do, and that we are strongly wanting to keep. Typically “walkable” means a mile or less – for us Westchester is close to 2 miles away.
That is actually not true at all. The areas of Oakview, McKoy, Hill and Benson that are zoned for Winona are around a 5 minute walk from Oakhurst with no crossing major streets. It is a 15 minute walk to Winona crossing two major streets during rush hour. That is a huge amount of time round trip in the morning, especially when you have kids at multiple schools.
In addition to the road barriers, there is the “ditch” or creek that lies east of S. McDonough.
According to Google maps at the very worst part (potentially impacting just a few families) there is a 5 minute walking difference.
Still, Winnona is quite walkable. Ironically that slightly longer walk is the distance we walk, and that we are very much wanting to keep.
I should caveat this to say that if there are barriers that truly make it not walkable I’d support ensuring those families can walk as well. I am not advocating for one group over another as I think that all families and kids benefit from the community bonding and mental health/fitness benefits that come from walking. It is one of the reasons many of us moved to Decatur and I’d hate to see any Decatur families lose it.
One thing that could add time to the google maps time is one’s proximity to a intersection with a crossing guard. The google maps probably would have you crossing S.Candler at the closest corner, which isn’t so easy at that time of day. We used to cross before there was a crossing guard at Kirk and Candler , but at least there was a traffic light (which cars frequently ran) but it would have added quite a bit more time to our trip had we walked down to the crossing guard at Dougherty. We chose to be walkers but many neighbors drove their kids.
Some families just don’t have the time to walk their kids 20 mins to school, walk 20 mins home, then get younger kids off to school and/or themselves to work on time.
Again a complete refusal to consider the K-5 possibility.
Take a step back and focus on the long term instead of the rush to re-open Westchester.
Rush? Are you kidding? It’s been in the works for almost three years and needed for ten, while our children are crammed into trailers and schools that are too small.
Just Cranky – have you seen the stats that go with the maps? Almost none of them allow for long-term growth in oakhust, some leave only a handful of available slots – and leave Clairmont and Westchester practical ghost towns. This does NOT solve any problems for more than a year or two…then what?
Yes, I have looked at the maps. What I find most interesting is that in map 7, the city is split evenly by College Ave. without sending any students north or south across the tracks. If you total the enrollment for each of the schools, the north side schools have 710 students and the south side schools have 702 students. So much for the explosive growth on the south side that everyone keeps mentioning. The growth is all over the city.
The problem is having three schools on the north side and only two on the south side. Hence your perceived “ghost towns” at Clairemont and Westchester. So do we just keep them ALL crowded and leave a building empty so people don’t have to leave their schools? Westchester kids want to walk to school, too. The answer is six K – 5 schools.
That’s is a very, very interesting point. I think the reason for the “explosion” over here is that it is a new thing while the north is more population stable
I think the relief valve for expansion on the south side is obviously converting College Heights back to K-3, which the Superintendent did note was something they would consider in a few years after the loan taken out to renovate it is paid off. As we currently have two kids at CH now and hopefully another down the road, we obviously have mixed feelings about this option, but I do think it is a good solution if a solid plan could be made to establish 0 – Pre-K somewhere else.
It seems like there’s a few specific areas that could get zoned different ways with huge consequences to either the neighborhood and/or the students. Those of us who don’t live in those areas may not understand what the residents care most about. These areas seem to be MAK, LP, north side of Winnona, but I could be missing others. Could those specific areas be polled, e.g. questions like:
– Which factors are most important to you and please rank them?
_ Staying in School X district
_ Going wherever the surrounding neighborhood/streets go
_ Being less than .X miles from a school
_ Not having to cross major thoroughfare X
That question is not the best or only question and responses, just an idea.
All maps have us redistricted to Westchester and will make for the third City of Decatur elementary school between my two boys (’10-’11 – Oakhurst, ’12-’13 – Clairmont & finishing 3rd Grade at Westchester). I wish my greatest school concern was walkability but it is not – little to do with actual education. My son loves F.AVE and would be a shame to revert back to “old school” mentality of K-5 so kids can walk to school.
Just a reminder that the Glennwood community lost our neighborhood school for 7 years back in 2004. We were districted to WP for all 7 years that my two middle children were in K-3. This is while we had 4 children in 4 different schools. Walking was out of the question for us, even though we bought our house specifically so we could walk to Glennwood which is .8 miles away. That reconfiguration was heart wrenching for us and changed our lives tremendously–a change sustained over two of our kids’ entire elementary experience. No, I’m still not over it, but we are at least lucky that WP was a great school, even though we did feel like “outsiders,” especially because our children didn’t walk and roll.
I am thrilled that we got Glennwood back, and it is an amazing school. Pain will be felt by some people in this process, and I for one am acutely aware of that pain. That’s why I wanted to serve on the committee–so that I could help to mitigate that pain for as many people as possible. I am disappointed that K-5s we’re not considered in this rendition, but I know they will in a few years. Meanwhile, whatever cards you are dealt, you can make the most of them by getting involved in your child’s school, being supportive of the teachers and principal, and walking everywhere ELSE as much as possible! My heart goes out to those who are going to lose their neighborhood schools.
Nicely said and many former Westchester families would share your sentiment. Losing a neighborhood school is a loss. It is a natural and positive phenomenon for families and neighbors to bond to their neighborhood school. Of course survivable, but still a real loss for a neighborhood. It’s hard to see other families go through redistricting and I wish them the best.
Emily, I hope that you will advocate for Westchester, as no one else seems to be doing that. People in the other neighborhoods are being quite vocal, but who speaks for a school community that stopped existing ten years ago?
I think there’s some families of young children in the Westchester area who are eager to have a neighborhood school. Hopefully they will step up to the plate. There will be more and more of such families as the Oakhurst area becomes too pricey for many and folks buy instead the cheaper, unrenovated, less quaint Westchester brick and asbestos siding 40s/50s era homes.