DISCUSSION: Will Two Rivers Lead to More Redistricting?
The new Two Rivers school would be located outside of the actual community. Is this the best policy?
Photos
The discussion of the potential new school to serve the Two Rivers community has sparked renewed chatter about redistricting of schools in west Anne Arundel County.
While there are no redistricting proposals on the table, observers of the debate over the new school said they can envision a shuffling of school assignments down the road, given the school's location and plans for other development in the area.
The Two Rivers school, if built, would be located to the northeast of the 2,060-home development, just south of the Waugh Chapel Towne Centre. As the crow flies, it's not too far away from the community. But students would be bused several miles up Patuxent Road and then back to the school by Strawberry Lake Way and Evergreen Road.
The circuitous bus route actually passes by Piney Orchard Elementary on the way to the Two Rivers School. Thus, students from Two Rivers would actually live closer to Piney Orchard Elementary School than the new school. And there could be some students from Piney Orchard who would be closer to the Two Rivers school than Piney Orchard Elementary.
Thus, many people can envision some redistricting eventually taking place.
This is a sensitive issue in Piney Orchard, because we're just a few years removed from a redistricting that moved many students in that community to Four Seasons Elementary. At the time, opponents of that plan insisted that Piney Orchard Elementary School was meant to serve Piney Orchard, and that there was value in having students attend school in the community where they lived.
The Two Rivers school will not be located directly in the Two Rivers community for several reasons. One is geography; officials said they literally couldn't find enough usable land. But also, school officials said they liked the idea of having a school further north, because it would accomodate students from other developments that might be coming on board in west county.
What do you think? Are we headed for another redistricting battle? Does it make sense to have the new school so far north? State your thoughts in the comments below.
Ronald
7:32 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
It makes sense to have the school in the communitty BUT having planned this out is not what the developer had in mind. Let it alone. You have no say in anything and should be grateful for the crums that you receive given the pathetic representation and courts we have. If you don't like what you get then get up and move. YOU ARE POWERLESS. ACCEPT AND MOVE ON!
Ronald
7:34 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
Build a road 'as the crow flies'. It can happen.
CM
8:41 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
The real reason for the proposed school is to open up additional land for development outside the Two Rivers subdivision. Koch is looking down the road and realizing that vacant lands in Gambrills and Crofton can't be developed unless there is school capacity in those areas. Under the last comprehensive rezoning a dozen or more parcels along RT3 were upzoned for more intensive development. Those areas are proximate to sewer and water lines and are ripe for development if there are schools nearby.
There needs to be a smaller size school built within Two Rivers that serves that community. Koch is a businessman so let him build a smaller private school that is financed by his new community, not a new public school that puts additional tax burden on the the rest of the community while he jams more homes and traffic into the Rt3 corridor.
I
Dave
8:55 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
What is ironic to me is that there was a huge fight last year in the County Council over rezoning a single lot in South County. Yet here in west county, allowing a landfill to be placed adjacent to a "planned" community is no problem.
The sad part is that the result of all of this misbehavior by those in the public trust is going to be the great opportunity lost of West County. If a well thought-out plan for development were followed, this area could definitely be the new and better Columbia. Instead, when high-earning workers on Fort Meade take a look at this area, they are going to see: their kids bussed to a distant school, landfills, development on top of landfills, and a significant lack of open green space. They will then all move to Howard County, and the value of the homes in this part of the AA county will erode.
Who is looking out for the common good, instead of what is good for this project today?
Meryl Tseng
8:59 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
Given that Two Rivers is going to be 2000+ single family homes, I don't see a 700 student school as being oversized. If there's only 1 elementary school aged child out of every 3 houses then it will be filled to capacity.
Amy
9:00 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
I understand that PO residents are partial to POES but the fact of the matter is that towns grow and new schools are built and sometimes that means that there is redistricting. POES was overcrowded when it open, it was overcrowded when Nantucket ES opened and the redistricting happened and even now it's full to overflowing. How many of the other elementary schools in this area have SIX kindergarden classrooms?! The likelihood that POES will _still_ be full or overcrowded when the new school in Two Rivers opens 11 years from now. The students who currently attend POES will be in middle or high school by the time this new school opens. It's time to realize all of the schools in this area are good schools. The students who were "taken" from POES and "forced" to attend Four Seasons are not suffering for attending a "lesser" school (as it was implied during the redistricting debate). The new school may affect children living in POES, but they are not likely to suffer as a result!
Chris W
10:05 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
I moved when they redisticted the last time because Four Seasons was an open concept school more than 30 years old. To say that it is just as good as POES is silly. It's funny that you can "know" that there have been no ill effects. I don't buy it!
kingofodenton2
10:20 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
@ Chris why is it silly to say that Four Seasons is just as good as POES? POES is newer, but newer is not always better. The age of the school has nothing to do with the quality of teachers or the quality of education you get from it.
Chris W
6:25 pm on Friday, August 10, 2012
Its not simply the age, it is that FS is an open concept school. Open concept was a misguided experiment in the 1970s that was more about cost savings in contruction than anything else.
Having attended open concept schools myself I can tell you that many kids find it difficult to concentrate in the loud environment created by the lack of many interior walls. I simply refused to subject my children to that.
Lisa
7:32 pm on Friday, August 10, 2012
It is true that open space was not always the best fit for all children, but the children I taught learned in it, regardless of attention. There are strategies and techniques specific to open space that can help with that.
What Chris may not know is that the county has been working on closing in the open space format. The lower level had walls put in last year and the upper floor has been getting them this summer. The building is immaculate and has a wonderful staff. If you look at test scores in the area, you will see that Four Seasons, Piney Orchard and Waugh Chapel are all doing well.
Chris W
7:57 pm on Friday, August 10, 2012
I was aware that they had plans to close in the school. It would not have helped with my oldest, and my youngest will be moving on soon as well.
I agree that the teachers make the biggest difference, and i am not critical of teachers at any of the local schools. That said, going from a 5 year old school with all the latest equipment to an older school outside of your community is difficult for parents to accept.
I understand that the county must redistrict from time to time, and my point was that the PO residents that don't like this plan can do what I did and vote with their feet.
Nancy Kotraba
11:04 am on Friday, August 10, 2012
I would say that this whole project and the way it is being handled shows how unconcerned the county can be about it's citizens. It is not to PO best interest to
have trees destroyed and to have a new road built to add more traffic to our roads.
Road studies were done throughout PO making the roads safe for all, using circles and "calming areas" without traffic lights. If this road was built all this was for naught and Traffic Lights would be needed. Road volume and noise levels would all increase for us, changing the quality of life for us all.
Chris W
6:30 pm on Friday, August 10, 2012
Once again, the good of the greater community trumps what some people in one community want.
PO does not control GORC. they do not own the land the school or road will be built on. They have no more say about the issue than any other Odenton residents.
Dave
7:06 pm on Friday, August 10, 2012
As a Piney Orchard resident, I would welcome the road through GORC and the school only on the condition that the planned Cunningham/Tolson Sanitary Landfill is rezoned to some other kind of use - even if it were zoned high density residential.
Until that time I strongly oppose destroying GORC and building a school for a distant development.
Chris W
7:34 pm on Friday, August 10, 2012
Destroying GORC?
They would use 1acre ang give back two. I'm confused.
Dave
12:28 am on Saturday, August 11, 2012
It would destroy GORC in at least three ways.
1.) The road would remove an existing paved trail through the forest at the southern side of GORC. I know this trail is popular with local citizens, because I often see them walking there.
2.) It would split GORC in half, the southern half being an area for forest preservation and possibly future expansion.
3.) The road would bring a busy traffic lane within yards of a well-used baseball field, which would endanger children and change the character of the field.
Dave
12:30 am on Saturday, August 11, 2012
The two acres in exchange appear to be a small buffer of land around the road, which is slated to be located on the land directly adjacent to a 70 acre landfill.
Chris W
8:50 am on Saturday, August 11, 2012
First, the trails you speak of are on the perimeter of the park. So when you say the road will take away the trail and " split the park in half". It sounds scary, but it is quite an exaggeration.
Secondly, you site the safety of the the road. Perhaps you are unaware that Strawberry Lake Way runs the length of the park and carries a large amount of traffic. I don't se how a road along a short edge of the park will be any less safe than Strawberry Lake Way.
Ronald
3:12 am on Saturday, August 11, 2012
Not all PO Residents are against the project or the road. The HOA does not speak for very many. They only speak for the three that own the apartment complexes there. Build the road and schoold - they will come.
Chris W
8:51 am on Saturday, August 11, 2012
And they do not speak for all of Odenton.
Michael
10:11 am on Saturday, August 11, 2012
They speak for me. Do you have any idea how much traffic would be increased on Strawberry Lake if there were a cut through from Rt 3?? During rush hour, forget about it - it will be impossible to cross the street. Add in all the kids trying to cross the street to get to the park on a busy football evening and that's a disaster waiting to happen. And right now, the park is completely on the other side of a major road. If the new road came, the park would have a whole other side where kids could potentially be hurt. School, neighborhood, fine. Putting a major cut through road for two very busy roads through a planned neighborhood - not good.
Chris W
10:15 am on Saturday, August 11, 2012
Do you know how many kids cross Srawberry Lake Way now? Give me a break. Look at the map. Where are this kids going to cross the road from? The woods? Please!
kingofodenton2
11:45 am on Saturday, August 11, 2012
As I read this thread it appears that many Piney Orchard residents on here like to exaggerate. Chris you make some good points.
David Daughters
12:11 am on Wednesday, September 26, 2012
"Officials could not find enough usable land to build a school within the community." Nonsense. They found usuabl land to build 2,060 homes. Let them build only 2,025 and use the other land for the school. Oops. That would reduce the developer's profit. I think what's really on the agenda is the comment about putting the school where it would facilitate "future development that might occur." The lie is the word "might". Of course, they will continure to develop and the county (and now the School Board) will give them whatever they want.