Tuesday, November 03, 2009

New Boundary Maps

I'll do a separate thread on the Work Session itself. So I'm sure some people have poured over the maps so point out anything I miss. (As well, the Work Session presentation gave some reasoning for changes but not in-depth. The only way at this point I can find it is at the Board website - clink on the link for the plan.)

Please note: for whatever reason, staff did NOT use the same coloring or streets on the two different maps. They said by tomorrow they will have up side by side comparisons but it is not easy to clearly see what changed.

High Schools -
  • They shifted Ingraham's NE boundary further east past the Jackson Golf Course. The reasoning is that it provided more of a walk area.
  • Ballard did NOT shift north of 85th but did lose the area of North Green Lake and west of Green Lake to Phinney/Greenwood Ave and lower West Woodland. All that area went into Roosevelt.
  • Roosevelt, for some strange reason, gained north area now moving to 85th as well as the area around Green Lake that Ballard lost. Now I get the Green Lake area because it is walking distance but I do not understand the movement north. This was NOT lost on the directors as Hale now has quite a smaller area as a couple of them pointed out. Tracy claims it is because the high school cohort is getting smaller over the next several years and quickly said it wasn't program issue but boy, it looks like it.
  • Chief Sealth and West Seattle switched some areas. West Seattle has a long arm down into SW Seattle to about SW Cloverdale while Chief Sealth rises up to the NE to just under the West Seattle Golf Course. (Steve Sundquist seemed glad to see this change but wasn't sure if everyone in SW/West Seattle would like it.)
Middle Schools/Elementary SW/SE
  • Obviously with the changes at Sealth and West Seattle, Madison and Denny changed to mirror them.
  • Aki Kurose looked about the same to me (except that they have changed Brighton's area somewhat and the NE corner for Brighton has gone to Van Asselt. That means that little area now changes from going to Aki to Mercer.
  • John Muir's north boundary line changed upward.
  • Kimball took some of Beacon Hill's northeast boundary. They also lost some east boundary to Maple.
  • Thurgood Marshall's northern boundary appears, to me, to have headed north somewhat. Anybody?
  • The NE part of Stevens boundary (Volunteer Park area) has moved over to the Lowell area.
  • Coe has dropped its southern boundary down further south, just under McClure. Additionally, its eastern boundary shifted west towards McClure.
  • BF Day got a bit of its area clipped off just NW of Woodland Park. Additionally, its northern border has dropped down to along N 50th.
  • Adam's northern boundary went slightly higher.
  • Loyal Heights took a west piece of Whittier that had jutted into its area.
  • Whittier/Greenwood; it's a little unclear to me where Whittier's southern boundary is. I think it may be a little further south on the west side.
  • It looks like a northern part of Greenwood is now into Viewlands and a northern part of Bagley has gone into Viewlands. It gains a NE portion of West Woodland. And that little bit that was to go to Hamilton is now in going to Whitman because of that change.
  • Olympic View's southern border has dropped taking in more of Maple Leaf.
  • View Ridge has taken the southeast corner of Sand Point. Sand Point now dips about half-way down into the previous northeast boundary of Laurelhurst.
  • Bryant has taken in a small piece of northwest Laurelhurst.
  • The UW campus was split between Laurelhurst and JSIS and now Laurelhurst takes all of UW.
  • JSIS now pops up a bit in ts NW border into McDonald.
  • Green Lake no longer has any of North Green Lake (which went over to Bagley).
  • Wedgwood's eastern boundary has shifted to mostly 35th Avenue NE (with View Ridge taking its lost part). Wedgwood and Bryant have shifted an area - Wedgwood's NW border has shifted south and Bryant's NE border has shifted north.
What did I miss? (Or get wrong; my eyes are all googly by now.)


Keepin'On said...

OK, I'll bite. Why is Hale being allowed to underenroll its building, when Roosevelt and Ballard are going to be stuffed and bursting?

Why are they allowed to start later than any other high school in the city?

Why the special treatment? Makes me mad, I'll say that.

SeattleMom said...

McDonald area also shrunk by three blocks from N 60th to 57th St west of I-5 which went to Green Lake. It seems odd to make the area close to the new McDonald school even smaller while it still stretches far east into the area north of the U-Village which includes the UW student housing. This also increases the Eckstein area and reduces the Hamilton area by those blocks. Is that what people between N 57th and 60th St wanted? I myself am still in the McDonald area and not affected.

Melissa Westbrook said...

When I get to the Work Session (sorry, that's tomorrow) my notes reflect discussion on both these issues.

SeattleMom said...

One more thing regarding McDonald School: I have counted at least four private schools in that area (UCDS, University Co-op, Meridian School, and St. Benedict). While these, of course, are drawing kids from the whole city (and beyond), they are also particular attractive to folks close by. I wonder whether the school district takes that into account when they count the number of people/kids in the McDonald area. One more reason to try to make McDonald a great (competitive) school. But as is, the new boundaries of McDonald look horrible, really squished in there. The old proposed boundaries where somewhat better, I think.

StepJ said...

I did notice that Eckstein is now overstuffed starting in 2012 vs. 2015. Personal observation - think that is from including Belvedere Heights (sorry if spelling wrong) in Sandpoint instead of Laurelhurst. That is a hood chock full of kids.

Josh Hayes said...

StepJ, I think SPS thinks that MS kids in that area will be happy to go to Addams RSN ("real soon now"), which should alleviate some of the pressure on Eckstein.

I hae me doots, but we'll have to wait and see.

StepJ said...

Hey Josh,

Best understanding is the numbers for Eckstein include a full enrollment of 450 at JA as a 'mushroom' model for middle school. And I believe also counting 150 at AS1.

Would bode well for the survival of AS1 perhaps? But, I am a naive politica - so no counting on my view.

north seattle mom said...

The presentation shows 3800 elementary students in the Eckstein middle school attendance area next year with that number growing to 4200 in the next few years.

Half of those students would be 1900 to 2100. There is no way that Eckstein and Jane Addams combined could hold even 1900 let alone 2100 middle school students. What are they thinking? Are they just hoping nobody will notice because they are so happy to get Eckstein?? That folks will still go to Shoreline even with a guaranteed assignment to Eckstein?

Stu said...

That folks will still go to Shoreline even with a guaranteed assignment to Eckstein?

I haven't combed through the fine print on all these documents yet but have a question. What happens if there's a surge and there are 300 more "guaranteed placement" applicants at Eckstein one year? Is there some formula that un-guarantees for some and not others?


Charlie Mas said...

The Board got a big document to go along with this presentation. Is it available online anywhere?

Charlie Mas said...

I have a few things to say about that meeting, but I'll wait for Mel's post about it. I will, however, make a separate post about some things said about APP at the meeting.

biliruben said...

Rogers goes 5 blocks north, for some reason.

Could someone expound on:

"This was NOT lost on the directors as Hale now has quite a smaller area as a couple of them pointed out. Tracy claims it is because the high school cohort is getting smaller over the next several years and quickly said it wasn't program issue but boy, it looks like it."

We just moved solidly into Hale territory with a not-yet-school-age kid and trying to get up to speed.


WallingfordMom said...

Boundary wise, it seems to me that they did take into consideration a lot of what people were requesting. The big exception being the northern boundary of Ballard though.

I agree with SeattleMom. The McDonald area is constructed oddly, and I am curious why they shrunk the N/S boundaries like they did. (Perhaps they are hoping the community is not organized enough to complain?) That area has a ton of families, many of them attending private school. I can see a lot of families opting out -- especially if it starts out as a K/1 and their older child cannot attend the school.

adhoc said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
adhoc said...

4200 kids in the Eckstein service area NEXT YEAR. What is the district planning on doing?

Even if Addams takes 450 (doubt it), and AS1 takes 150, and 1330 (35%) go private that still leaves 1870 kids in Eckstein's service area, and only 1200 seats in the school. That's 670 kids to many.

Of course some students will choose schools outside of their attendance areas, some will home school, and even with guaranteed assignment some may still go to Shoreline (for a small middle school experience).

Will it balance out? What happens if it doesn't? Where do they put the extra kids? Eckstein already has an entire parking lot full of portables............

old salt said...

Ad Hoc,

Where did you find the number of 4200 middle school students in the Eckstein service area next year?

West Seattle said...

In West Seattle the elementary boundaries shifted a lot for all of them. They also did align the Denny/Sealth boundaries as promised.

emeraldkity said...

the southern boundary line for West woodland has also moved farther south.

Mum o 2 said...

Does anyone know how early admission kids will be handled? If they 'pass' and are allowed to enter K early will they get their attendance area school or whatever seats happen to be open at underenrolled schools? I will ask on the SPS website but don't anticipate a quick answer from there.

Carolyn said...

we enrolled early and were told that we'd get a letter in February with our attendance area school assignment. I said my son has an older sib, what about that?! fwiw the clerk said that if they were going to make changes for sibs then that would occur in January. otherwise we could apply to our older child's school during the March open enrollment period.

so, who knows what will happen.

blumhagn said...


The big document should be available today online and possibly in print at the meeting.

TechyMom said...

Another transition question:
What happens with kids who were in private or out of district schools? My block is now in the McGilvra attendance area, and was in the reference area, but kids here have been given mandatory assignements to Madrona since MLK closed. There are a couple kids on my block who go to private or out of district schools (currently in k and 1). Will they be given a seat at McGilvra if they want it?

What about a kid who moves to my block this summer?

Should a kid returning from private school be treated the same as one who moves to the city?

A fair number of preschools offer K, and kids who go to these programs enter public school in 1st grade. K is still optional (legally) in this state. Shouldn't 1st grade be treated as an entry grade?

adhoc said...

"Will they be given a seat at McGilvra if they want it? What about a kid who moves to my block this summer? "

Techymom, as I understand it, through the transition period, the guaranteed assignment only applies to entry level grades at each school (K for McGilvra). So if a kid wanted to switch from private school to McGilvra they wouldn't have "guaranteed" assignment, though they could of course apply for a spot.

adhoc said...

Oops, Eckstein predicted to have 4200 kids in their service area in the next few years, not next year.

h2o girl said...

So the Hamilton svc area does not have an option school. I'm wondering why the district is using Salmon Bay, which always has an enormous waitlist, as the linked option school for that area, when they could use one or more of the THREE option schools in the Eckstein area? The option schools don't have the feeder school tiebreaker into the middle schools, so it wouldn't put any more pressure on Eckstein. I also think that Green Lake elementary should be in the Hamilton area. The Eckstein numbers don't look sustainable.

Catherine said...

So what does happen to a child entering 1st grade (or any other "non-entry grade") in 2010 who is new to SPS? My child is in K at his preschool this year. Our assigned elementary is Viewridge. Will he be placed there for first grade or some other school? Is he not guaranteed a space anywhere? I'm confused.

TechyMom said...

Exactly my question. The documents talk about kids moving from one school to another, but aren't clear about what happens to kids who are new to SPS (whether becuase the moved here, or because they have been in private or out of district schools). I hope this will be covered in detail in the transition plan.

adhoc said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
adhoc said...

Catherine, I emailed Tracy Libros to ask her that very question.

Tracy says that you are *not* guaranteed a space at your attendance area school except for the entry level grade. You can apply for a seat in an upper grade, but are not guaranteed the spot. It's subject to availability.

I have emailed her again and asked her if:
More people apply than there are spots for an upper grade, and all of those people live in the attendance area of that school, how they will choose who gets in? Will there be tie breakers, or is it pure lottery? No answer from Tracy as of yet and can't find it anywhere in any SAP info or document.

Also is there any difference in assignment rules for someone new to the district, or a child who is currently attending another SPS school that wants to transfer to his new attendance area school?

None of this is clear.

Does anyone else know??

adhoc said...

Next question.

If more kids in the attendance area of a school apply for an upper grade seat than there are seats available, where will they assign the kids who don't get in?

For elementary will kids be guaranteed another school in their attendance area (so they can get transportation)? Or can they be assigned anywhere in the district? What about for middle school and HS where there is only one school in the service area? What if the MS or HS doesn't have space for the child? Will they be assigned elsewhere in the city? Do MS students get yellow bus if that happens? Will there be such a thing as mandatory assignments?

So many questions....

lak367 said...

adhoc, I don't think we'll have any answers on your questions until they develop the "transition plan," unfortunately.

Catherine, I understand it the same as others right now. An incoming 1st grader who did K at another school will only get into their assignment area school if there is space. There are 92 Kindergarteners at View Ridge this year, and there are 107 1st graders. That suggests to me that they may in fact accept incoming 1st graders in the fall (because K has 15 less bodies than 1st right now). Unfortunately, the district has abandoned small class sizes in the NE, and perhaps throughout the district. I'd contact the VR principal and see what her impression is.

My guess if there isn't room at VR is that your son would be assigned to Jane Addams, given their need to fill that school at all grades. My neighbors' son went to a private K last year but could not get into Bryant this year because the 1st grade class is already over-capacity. They were assigned to Jane Addams, but did not go. They stayed private and will keep trying to get into Bryant year after year. Their younger child is now guaranteed a spot at Bryant, but her brother may never get in.

Josh Hayes said...

h20girl, I think the linkage to Salmon Bay for the Eckstein area is a relic of the guarantee for Thornton Creek 5th-graders to enter Salmon Bay as 6th-graders, due to the historical connection between AE2 (Thornton Creek) and NOMS (now rolled into Salmon Bay). This also has historically meant that SB gets yellow-bus transportation from across the north end (although I don't know if that'll continue next year).

Frankly, I think the catchment area for Salmon Bay is ridiculous: NOBODY gets in there from more than a mile away or so, except for the TC holdovers.

h2o girl said...

Josh, I know about the TC connection, but Salmon Bay will not be linked to the Eckstein area in the new SAP, it'll be linked to the Hamilton area. And actually Salmon Bay get busses city-wide now(for middle school). You would not believe the amount of busses lined up outside the school every afternoon - it goes up the entire block. I was thinking that AS1 might get some more kids if it was linked to the Hamilton svc area (instead of Salmon Bay) with transportation.

Anyway, it'll be interesting to see if kids will have transportation grandfathered for the next couple years, and how enrollment at SB will shake out when it's no longer an all-city draw.

Maureen said...

I'm worried about what will happen to all of the alternative school kids who lose transportation in a year or two but are shut out of their neighborhood schools because the guarantee only applies for entry grades.

h2o girl said...

I know Maureen, it is definitely worrisome. Is TOPS an all-city draw for transporation currently?

Charlie Mas said...

The data books are now available online.

Maureen said...

h2ogirl-TOPS kids are currently bused from five clusters. Under the new SAP, the kids from NW, QA/Mag, S and SE won't have transportation. They also won't have a guaranteed spot at an attendance area school unless they are going into 6th grade. That means over half of our kids will be stuck.

Salmon Bay is similar I think? But at lest most of your kids from far away are MSers and will get Metro passes. What do the Metro routes to SB look like?

TechyMom said...

ORCA will have similar issues. There are lots of kids from Central/Washington SA bussed to ORCA.

h2o girl said...

A brief review of the SB directory (from last year, we don't have the one for this year yet) tells me we had about 30 kids from QA/Mag, 45 kids from Central/S/SE/WS, and 75 kids from NE in the middle school. If transportation is grandfathered for a couple years, SB will not have any kids who are "stuck" really, since the elementary grades don't get all-city busses. But the makeup of the middle school will certainly be less diverse after that. I think the new transportation rules are part of the plan for the slow death of the alts. I hope I'm wrong and they'll thrive with neighborhood kids.