Poll: Thoughts on Urban Schools in High Rise Buildings

[JD984]

TE - I'm not trying to be confrontational. I think a blog that focused on the Tysons redevelopment plans, how they are being implemented, what types of decisions will need to be made at different times, and how they may impact current and future residents would be great. The general notion that, if Tysons eventually is densely populated with school-age children, FCPS (or, what, Tysons City) may need to consider alternatives to the typical school building model seems relatively uncontroversial to me.

FYI, here's the discussion of anticipated school needs in the Comprehensive Plan for Tysons, which seems to suggest a potential need for additional elementary schools, but not middle or high schools, over the next few decades. The ongoing renovation of Marshall HS to expand its capacity seems to be consistent with the discussion in this document. Maybe it will turn out that the projections for additional school-age children will underestimate the number of new students and more capacity will need to be added. I'd hate for FCPS to spend over $90 M to renovate Marshall, though, and then not make use of the additional capacity because someone decided that Tysons won't be a real destination unless a secondary school gets put in a multi-use building with MITRE or SAIC!

"The Tysons Corner Urban Center is currently served by a total of ten public schools. There are four elementary schools: Freedom Hill, Spring Hill, Westbriar, and Westgate. Tysons is served by three middle schools: Cooper, Kilmer, and Longfellow. Finally, there are three high schools: Langley, Marshall and McLean. Under the envisioned growth for Tysons, there will be a need for at least two new elementary school sites in Tysons. One school could be located in the North Central district where it could share recreational space with the proposed eight to ten acre park. Another school could be located in the East Side district. The existing Westgate Elementary School could be expanded. Consistent with the vision of a more urban Tysons, an elementary school could also be located in a commercial office building, provided that all access, safety, security and play space requirements are met. An elementary school has a capacity for 900 students. The existing households in Tysons generate 400 elementary students. Between 2010 and 2030, projections call for 12,900 new households in Tysons. This number of new households will generate an additional 555 elementary students, resulting in a need for the first elementary school by 2030.

Between 2030 and 2050, projections call for another 20,700 new households in Tysons. This number of new households will generate an additional 890 elementary students, resulting in a need for the second elementary school by 2050. A middle school has a capacity for 1,250 students. Between 2010 and 2050 there are projected to be a total of 33,600 new households in Tysons. This number of new households will generate an additional 370 new middle school students. For purposes of long-range planning, expansion of one of the middle schools serving Tysons (Kilmer or Thoreau) is projected to be needed by the year 2050. Pimmit Hills Alternative High School may in the future be considered for use as an elementary or middle school. A secondary school may also need to be considered. A high school has a capacity for 2,000 students. Between 2010 and 2050 there are projected to be a total of 33,600 new households in Tysons. This number of new households will generate an additional 806 new high school students. For purposes of long-range planning, expansion of the existing high school serving Tysons, Marshall, is projected to be needed by the year 2040."

[irvine]

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

The population of the school may be decreasing but the building was created to be able to house 2000 students. Frankly based on 404,000 sf the building could house far greater than 2000, this puts it as one of the largest square footage per student high schools in the world. Wakefield also has many of the designs that the other urban "renovations" have. I highlight the word renovation as other than the fact that the property remained in tact on this project essentially all components of the old school will be demolished and a new structure will be put up.

So the school system must have increased the capacity for Wakefield to 2000, especially since W-L and Yorktown don't have room for any additions. W-L and Yorktown are officially 1,600 student buildings.

The downside to Wakefield's location is that it's at the edge of the county in an area of neighborhoods that are segregated by topography, strip malls, and busy multi-lane roads. So unlike W-L or Yorktown high schools, it won't be that conducive to pedestrian activity. But it will be more pedestrian friendly than most Fairfax County high schools, and like the new W-L and Yorktown buildings it will become a visible community landmark.

Arlington's schools are also community centers; i.e. the fields, track, pool, etc are open to community use all day and into the evening (even during school hours.) Fairfax has always been a bit more strict regarding entering school property especially during school hours, but it could look to Arlington for a decent model on shared community/school spaces.

[tysonsengineer]

Thank you for clarifying, and I agree that the comprehensive plan does provide great detail in some respects. Again though there is no discussion of how a school can actually be put into a commercial office. Which spaces would be deemed necessary within the building and how much space within that building would be necessary. If for instance a 400,000 sf area would be necessary then the numbers are completely thrown off and couldnt fit in the type of footprint viable for a commercial office building. Our post therefore centered on how we could get the SF usage by students down from the numbers being seen in most of NOVA to numbers that could work in an office.

Also, the comp plan really is focusing on elementary schools within the city, our point is that in Arlington we are seeing families living in TOD regions with 14-18 yo children. I really like the comp plan, I am definitely not against it, but I think there is some gray areas. When the city reaches a point with a significant highschool population it should definitely use G Marshall, its a nice sized facility that is close to Pimmit where a lot of the residential zones in Tysons exists and will continue to be. At a certain point Marshall could even be strictly used for the Tysons area and Falls Church (which really does need a new school in the next 5-10 years anyways) could be compensated with a new building.

The problem with GMarshall for the latest growth in Tysons is that several 2-3 br units in multifamily structures are built or are being built along the TOD area on Westpark, Greensboro, International, and along Route 7 TOD where the population is expected to go from 0 to 10,000 over the next 15 years. If trends like Arlington's continue where these 2-3 br units have highschool aged children we could be looking at 500 to 1000 kids specific to that region which could benefit eventually from a scaled down version of what we are discussing on the site. The nice thing about a commercial office is the capability to expand as needed, perhaps setting up future growth options, etc.

I think eventually in the 50 year time span of growth there will be a need for something like this and outside of Tysons I think there are dozens of regions in the country, right now, facing the dilemma that Arlington had this past decade. At the end of the day I hope these jurisdictions look to something better than projects such as Wakefield where they are tearing down the entire structure anyways to put up a new building. For the cost of that project the county could have had a windfall for this 35 acres, taken that money plus the money for the project (115m) and bought 3 or 4 much more efficient facilities without the land.

I appreciate your points and think this kind of discussion is the reason I started the website in the first place because in an area like ours there are a lot of priorities and points of view and the greater good of the public needs to be addressed equally and with greater thought.

[irvine]

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

If trends like Arlington's continue where these 2-3 br units have highschool aged children we could be looking at 500 to 1000 kids specific to that region which could benefit eventually from a scaled down version of what we are discussing on the site. The nice thing about a commercial office is the capability to expand as needed, perhaps setting up future growth options, etc.

I think eventually in the 50 year time span of growth there will be a need for something like this and outside of Tysons I think there are dozens of regions in the country, right now, facing the dilemma that Arlington had this past decade.

The vast majority of middle (and up) class families with kids in Arlington's public schools live in single family homes, most within walking distance of an elementary, middle or high school. The high rises of Ballston usually have no more than a dozen or so students at W-L in any given year. If more families started to move into those high rise units, Arlington will have a much more serious overcrowding problem.

Originally Posted by tysonsengineer

At the end of the day I hope these jurisdictions look to something better than projects such as Wakefield where they are tearing down the entire structure anyways to put up a new building. For the cost of that project the county could have had a windfall for this 35 acres, taken that money plus the money for the project (115m) and bought 3 or 4 much more efficient facilities without the land.

Splitting up Wakefield into smaller school sites would not have met state guidelines for a comprehensive high school, nor the county's guidelines for high school facilities (which includes parking, field, and open space requirements.)

Also the Wakefield site is in a residential area not near a major transit line, so selling the property for another use would not have been a prudent move. And the county would never rezone that low density area for commercial or high density residential uses.

[tysonsengineer]

Hmmmm, I never thought of it that way, that is a good point that Wakefield is essentially in the "suburbs" of Arlington where its 99% residential. I forget that Arlington really is much bigger than the area of the city itself.

Lets take away the idea of wakefield itself, as I think your comment sort of just derailed that last point of mine, your first points hit more to my concern/concept. People who can't afford the single family detached homes in Arlington (prohibitively expensive), need to live close to the city (imagine a world with both congestion on the roads in the burbs and 5 or 6 dollar gas), and still want a small family (1 or 2 children).

In my building there are currently a handful of families with high school aged children living in the 2 and 3 bedroom units. Some of these units that people are building in the nicer high rise condos are essentially stacked townhomes, I mean realistically with this trend of unit type people really could raise smaller families quite comfortably right in the heart of a metropolitan area. For the most part these new developments bring in unimaginable tax revenue capabilities as typically these units sell for 500 or 600k if not more, and can be stacked for 200+ units per acre. The county clearly has an interest also in compiling these populations as it makes metro more viable while decreasing overall network traffic and decreasing maintenance costs on infrastructure so they will want to garner this population.

So you make the point, if this happens and these people are now well outside of the traditional low density detached housing zone, what does a city do to address this new populations needs?

I know these are a whole load of assumptions, but again none of those assumptions seem outlandish by nature over the next 50 years, atleast in my opinion. Thoughts?