Copy
Ward 2 News - the latest on development, our downtown, upcoming events, and more.
View this email in your browser
Share
Tweet
Forward

March 2017

Revised dates for school closure review process

A decision about school closures in Burlington has been delayed one month, and an extra night for public delegations has been added. The new dates are as follows:

Director’s Report with Recommendation posted: April 21
Committee of the Whole (Trustees): April 26
Public Delegation Nights: May 8, May 11
Director’s Final Report Report to Board of Trustees: May 17
Final Vote by Trustees: June 7

More information: Next Steps in school review process

Schools, development, public meetings

More news





New Street road diet extended to the fall



 

Coming to City Standing Committees April 3, 4, 6

(click title to read article & comment online)  

New Briefs:

(click title to read article online)

 

 
Ask the Councillor Mar2017: Presto pass costs, clothing bins at retail malls, recycling plastic bags



Community Calendar



Contact Me

Development, budget, neighbourhoods

Public meeting March 28 on 27-storey proposal at Brant/James

Residents are invited to attend a public meeting to learn more and provide input on a proposed 27 storey mixed-use building at Brant and James, across from City Hall.

Details:

Date:    Tues. March 28
Time:     7pm
Place:    Art Gallery of Burlington, 1333 Lakeshore Rd

I will attend to provide introductions and moderate the Question & Answer period; city staff will provide information on the current planning provisions for the site and the planning process; the applicant will be on hand to present the proposal.

For more information on this project, and My Take, visit my earlier article here: 27 storey proposal on Brant St

More information about this project is also available on the city's webpage dedicated to this project: 421-431 Brant/James

Read more and comment
Share Article
Tweet Article
Forward Article

How do you choose a school to close? Some options worse than others, none great

On what basis do you decide to close a school? That was the task given to the Burlington Program & Accommodation Review Committee (PARC) of 14 parents. We had 13 criteria to assess school closure options to eliminate 1800 empty pupil spaces across seven high schools in Burlington.

As one of two parent representatives on the PARC for Burlington Central High School, I came into this process with a commitment to do what is best for all our students, and go where the evidence takes us. I entered the discussion with an open mind - but not an empty mind. Knowing the community as I do, it made no sense to me to close Central - the director's initial recommendation along with closing Pearson.

The more we have learned through months of discussion and mountains of data, the less sense it makes to close Central.

There are five options left on the table. One option to close Central & Pearson - 19b - was dropped because it is too similar to option 28c. Of the remaining options, which include closing Central & Pearson, closing Bateman, closing Bateman & Pearson, and closing Nelson, where does the evidence point? The evidence only suggests that there are some options that are worse than others, and none that are great. There will be community disruption no matter what the board does, including closing no schools. At minimum, boundary changes will be required to address overenrolment at Hayden and underenrolment at MMRobinson, Pearson and Bateman.

There is growing support in the community and around the PARC table for a no schools close option, supplemented with boundary changes, community use of schools, cooperation with the Catholic board, and innovative programming to increase the student body, through such ideas as creating regional programs (for example, a cabinet making program in Burlington; the closest is in Georgetown; or an arts program so Burlington students don't need to go to Etobicoke School of the Arts).

Those are some of the ideas being discussed at the final PARC meetings, which are set to wrap up March 27.

Below is a snapshot of some of the criteria across all of the schools, showing just how difficult the school closure decision is - as it should be.

Programming challenges

One of two reasons the PAR began was to address programming conflicts and challenges, largely assumed to be driven by low enrolment.

So do you close the school with the highest course conflict rate? Data on timetable conflicts provided to the PARC found Lester B Pearson has the highest at 44%, followed by Aldershot at 38%, Central at 32%, MM Robinson at 25%, Bateman at 21%, Nelson at 18% and Hayden at 11%.

However, boundary changes directing students from Pearson to the now-overflowing Hayden have led to low enrolment at Pearson. Redirecting students back to Pearson would address two issues: Hayden overcrowding and Pearson under-enrolment.

The next highest school with course conflicts is Aldershot - not even on the closure list (and shouldn't be).

Enrolment

Let's turn to low enrolment below 65% of capacity - the other reason the PAR was called.

Do you close the emptiest school? That would be MM Robinson - also not one of the closure options.

According to 2016-2017 projections MM Robinson's utlization rate is 50%, followed by Bateman at  56%, Pearson at 59%, Central at 68%, Nelson at 79% and Aldershot at 83%. Hayden is overcapacity, at 139%, but again this could be addressed by directing students to the three lowest enrolment schools: MM Robinson or Pearson (both North of the QEW like Hayden) or Bateman (South of Hayden, South of the QEW).

Further, a PARC member has done a detailed analysis of school size and enrolment and found that while generally the fewer students the more potential for course conflicts, there is no statistical correlation between the two.

Presently Burlington as a whole has a course conflict rate of 23%, which would minimally drop to 18.7 % with a one school closure or 15.6% with a two school closure. It doesn't make sense to close one or more schools and push enrolment over 100% at some schools for such a small (almost negligible) improvement in course selection for students.

Costs

One of the criteria for evaluating school closure options is "fiscal responsibility." So let's look at costs, namely the five year projected renewal needs, annual operating costs and costs for compliance with accessibility legislation.

Should you close the most expensive school to renew? That would be Bateman (see chart below).

However, the data we received has been roundly criticized by the PARC and public for several reasons. The renewal costs have changed dramatically over several months, by a factor of $23m between the release of the first set of costs in December and the latest version in January. For Central (and possibly other schools) some of the costs included work already completed - to the tune of more than $1 million. Finally, the time horizons for each school vary from six years to 19 years - like comparing apples and oranges. The data is so suspect the PARC has been advised not to focus on costs.

Nevertheless, here are the numbers: (excluding Hayden; as a new school its renewal costs are negligible):

  Aldershot Bateman Central MM Robinson Pearson Nelson
Dec 2016 $1.8m $17m $1.9m $10.8m $9.3m $7.8m
Jan 2017 $3.8m $10.4m $8.6m $8.1m $5.4m $6.4m
Time Horizon

2003 -

2014

2013 -

2018

2003 -

2021

2003 -

2021

2014 -

2018

2003 -

2015

Range 12 yrs 6 yrs 19 yrs 19 yrs 5 yrs 13 yrs

Do you close the school with the highest annual operating costs? Here's how those numbers compare across schools (presented as "operating savings" should that school close):

  Aldershot Bateman Central MM Robinson Pearson Nelson
Operating savings by facility 2015/2016 $490k $764k $584k $671k $564k $595k

Additionally, all schools are required to come into compliance with the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) legislation by 2025, meaning elevators, accessible doors, ramps, and other features. Those costs are below for each school, however they do not include the cost for a recommended upgrade in elevators for Aldershot, Pearson and Nelson from their current LULA (Limited Use, Limited Access) elevator, or a required new elevator at MM Robinson. In addition, Central's AODA costs contain a higher percentage of overall costs than other schools for asbestos abatement during construction - however, most of the the school was built in 1922, before asbestos was used.

  Aldershot* Bateman Central MM Robinson Pearson* Nelson*
AODA $1.6m $925k $3.2m $1.4m $1.5m $1.7m

*These schools have a LULA, which the report recommends be upgraded, the cost of which is not included in the above totals. Read full AODA report

AODA are one-time expenses required under legislation for all schools, and can be phased in over the next seven years. To put these costs in perspective, the cost to bring Central into compliance phased in over seven years is $457k per year. That's not much more than the $378k annual cost to bus an additional 600 students (at $630 per student) if Central & Pearson were closed (see busing chart below). Plus, busing costs continue in perpetuity every year, whereas AODA are one time expenses.

In addition, closing Central & Pearson will lead to overcrowding at Aldershot (capacity jumps to 129% in 2018), Aldershot can accommodate 10 portables, at $60,000 each in installation (plus annual operating), for a total of $600,000.

Thus, any "savings" from closing Central to avoid AODA costs will vanish within about five years, leaving only ongoing busing and portable costs.

Walkability:

One of the 13 criteria is "proximity to other schools (non-bus distances, natural boundaries, walking routes)." Student groups and programs can move to different schools, but nothing changes geography.

So, do you close a school in close proximity to another school? In the south that would be either Nelson or Bateman, 1.9km apart. This close proximity to each other is one of the reasons PARC members added Bateman and Nelson to the closure list.

In the North, that would be Pearson, whose catchment overlaps with MM Robinson and Hayden. However, Pearson could take some of the overflow from Hayden if it remained open.

The map above provides the walking distance for each school, shown by the circles.

The following chart shows the percent of students who are not eligible for busing because they live within walking distance of 3.2km or attend an optional program for which there is no busing:

  Aldershot Bateman Central MM Robinson Pearson Nelson Hayden
% of students not bused 62% 76% 93% 93% 99% 90% 62%

The director's initial recommendation to close Central & Pearson would create an 11.4km hole in the heart of the city with no school, in an intensification area with the highest growth targets of the whole city. A school where 93% of kids live within walking distance would turn into a school where 100% of kids are bused outside the neighbourhood. This is not a one-time transition. Closing Central would permanently remove the only school from a thriving community and bus kids out of their neighbourhood.

Busing

The increase in students bused under each option is below:

No schools close (Option 7b): 131

Close Bateman (Option 4b): 262 students

Close Bateman and Pearson (Option 23d): 286

Close Nelson (Option 3c:) 364

Pearson/Central Close (Option 28c): 615

When Hayden was built, part of the rationale was to keep kids within their community and promote walking to school. Before the new school opened, a Boundary Review Committee was struck to set boundaries. Among their criteria for measuring boundary options was "proximity to schools (walking distances, safe school routes, natural boundaries)." The Committee's preferred recommendation was presented to the Board of Trustees in a report May 16, 2012. The recommendation satisfied several criteria including that "the majority of students attending the new Burlington NE high school will be able to walk to school."

Read: HDSB Boundary Review Committee report on Hayden May 16 2012

The principle here is that you put schools where students are, and you keep schools where students live. That the same rationale must apply today to keeping Central open.
 

Minimal disruption:

 
There is significant variation among the options in terms of the number of kids who will have to change schools, as well as the number of "split cohorts" meaning Grade 6, or Grade 7-8 classes will go to different high schools, separating friends who've gone to school together since kindergarten.
 
The summary outlines the estimated number of students impacted by each option:
 

No school closure (Option 7b):

Reduced Hayden catchment: 568 students redirected
IB program moves to Pearson: 174
Gifted program moves to Pearson: 110
Total students impacted (must move schools):  852
PLUS:
Three split cohorts
One elementary school redirected


Bateman closes (Option 4b):

Bateman students redirected: 747
Central boundary expands to Guelph Line: 43
Total students impacted (must move schools):  790
PLUS:
No split cohorts
Two elementary schools redirected
 

Nelson closes (Option 3c):

Nelson students redirected: 1006
FI moves Central to Aldershot: 61
FI moves Hayden to Bateman: 276
Total students impacted (must move schools):  1343
PLUS:
Five split cohorts
Two elementary schools redirected
 

Bateman & Pearson Close (Option 23d):

Bateman students redirected: 747
Pearson students redirected: 379
FI moves Hayden to MM Robinson: 276
Central boundary expands: 184
Total students impacted (must move schools):  1586
PLUS:
Four split cohorts
No elementary schools redirected


Central & Pearson Close (Option 28c):

Central students redirected: 593
Pearson students redirected: 379
Bateman expands to include Nelson/Hayden students: 388
FI moves Hayden to MM Robinson: 276
PAR required for 7/8s at Central: 260
Total students impacted (must move schools):  1896
PLUS:
Six split cohorts
Three elementary schools redirected

Based on the above analysis, the most disruptive option to students of the five is closing Central/Pearson, with close to 2000 students uprooted and changing schools, not counting the impact on elementary students from split cohorts (kids from an elementary school going to different high schools) and elementary schools redirected from their current high school to another high school.
 

Don't swing from undercapacity to overcapacity


Several of the options swing from undercapacity to overcapacity at some schools, putting students in portables, the very thing that we are trying to correct at Hayden. One of the criteria for the PAR to consider in evaluating options is the "goals and focus of the current multi-year plan". The school utilization goal of the plan is 90%. When schools drop below 65%, a Program & Accommodation Review can be called. In the options below, where there is overcapacity at some schools and also undercapacity (below 65%) at others, further boundary changes could address both under and over capacity.

Here is how the utilization rate for schools compares among the options by 2018 (the date any school closure/boundary change is expected to begin):
 

No schools close (Option 7b):

  • Overall utilization: 74%-80%
  • Schools overcapacity: Pearson 116%
  • Schools below 65%: Bateman 54%; MMRobinson 64%

Nelson closes (Option 3c):

  • Overall utilization: 91%-98%
  • Schools overcapacity: Bateman 107%; Pearson 109%;
  • Schools below 65%: None

Bateman closes (Option 4b):

  • Overall utilization: 91%-97%
  • Schools overcapacity: Nelson 114%; Pearson 131%; Hayden 112%
  • Schools below 65%: MMRobinson 62%

Bateman & Pearson close (Option 23d):

  • Overall utilization: 102%-109%
  • Schools overcapacity: Nelson 121%; MMRobinson 104%; Hayden 116%
  • Schools below 65%: None

Central & Pearson Close (Option 28c):

  • Overall utilization: 94%-101%
  • Schools over capacity: Aldershot 129%; Hayden 104%
  • Schools below 65%: None

Next Steps:

The final PARC meeting is March 27, the director's recommendation report is expected April 21, the public delegation evenings to trustees are May 8 and 11, and the trustees vote on an option June 7. More information is available here: Next Steps

Comment
Share Article
Tweet Article
Forward Article

BSCI seniors forum March 28, Burlington Central Library

Seniors in Burlington are invited to a Seniors Forum, March 28, 10am to noon, at Burlington Central Library, hosted by the Burlington Seniors Community (formerly Burlington Seniors Centre Inc board).

Find out what this group has been doing, learn about some ideas for the future and how you can get involved. The main purpose of the forum is to sign up members to BSCI using criteria approved by the Board, recruit BSCI volunteers, provide information on new BSCI initiatives and get input for future initiatives.

This event is free. Everyone is welcome.

Learn more about the BSC here: Burlington Seniors Community

Read more and comment
Share Article
Tweet Article
Forward Article

Municipal groups add voice to concerns about school Program & Accommodation Review process

Both the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) and the Rural Ontario Municipal Association (ROMA) have written to the province raising concerns about school closures and asking for several changes to school funding allocation and Accommodation Review Guidelines which outline the process for school closure decisions.

In a March 16 letter to Premier Hon. Kathleen Wynne and Minister of Education, Hon. Mitzie Hunter, AMO notes that the issue of school closures “has risen to the forefront among our members, with many municipal governments passing Council resolutions calling for a moratorium on school closures.” Burlington is a member of AMO and the mayor sits on the board. Our council has not taken a position on school closures.

ROMA raised the negative impact of busing kids out of their community, often long distances to a larger school.

“While we recognize that busing students to larger schools may offer them a broader range of courses, specialized facilities and access to extracurricular activities, it also means these students lose the connection to their own communities.” stated ROMA’s March 15 letter to the premier and education minister.

Links to the AMO and ROMA letters are below.

AMO and ROMA have added their voice to a growing number of individuals and groups who have raised concerns about the PAR process and asked for a moratorium on school closures across the province until the PAR process and funding formula can be revised to address concerns.

On March 7, I travelled to Queen's Park with a group of other Burlington residents and students to deliver an open letter to the three provincial party leaders seeking a moratorium on school closures till changes can be implemented. Several of us also had an opportunity to meet with Hon. Eleanor McMahon our local MPP and staff from Hon. Education Minister Mitzie Hunter's office to discuss PAR concerns.

Read the Open Letter signed by several Burlington PAR Committee members, residents, and groups outside Burlington undergoing PARs.

A number of residents have also directly contacted our local MPP, the premier and education minister and others to share concerns about the PAR. Nelson parent Brett Huttman prepared a 17-page “deep dive” raising concerns about the process.

"The PAR process is flawed and divisive, not living up to the expectation of collaboration with communities or seeking out creative solutions," he noted in his analysis.

Read his full report here: More questions raised about PAR process

At the conclusion of the PAR process (after the trustees vote June 7), the school board will review the process and seek input for improvements. Myself and many others will be submitting feedback based on what we've learned by participating in Burlington's PAR.

Read the AMO/ROMA letters:

AMO School Closures 2017-03-16

ROMA Rural School Closures 2017-03-15

My Take:

I welcome AMO and ROMA adding their voice to this discussion alongside many others in the community, raising concerns that those of us involved in the Program & Accommodation Review process in Burlington have discovered along the way. Change is necessary to the funding formula, PAR process and long-term board planning to protect the best interests of students and communities, and be fiscally responsible.

Read more and comment
Share Article
Tweet Article
Forward Article

Video series outlines issues with school closures, PAR process

Want a quick introduction to why closing Central is not beneficial to students, and why the entire Program & Accommodation Review process needs to be changed? Check out this video series, providing quick outlines of the school closure issues:

Video: Closing Central creates a hole in the heart of the city

Video: Burlington school closures and changing data

Video: Burlington schools trading overcapacity for undercapacity

Video: Burlington school closures and population counts

Video: Burlington school closures and community consequences
 

Comment
Share Article
Tweet Article
Forward Article

New Street road diet extended to October

The one-year pilot project to narrow New Street for on-road bike lanes from Guelph Line to Walkers Line commenced on August 23, 2016. The pilot consisted of reducing the existing 4-lane cross section to 3-lanes (eliminating one vehicle lane in each direction), introducing a centre two-way left-turn lane, as well as provision of buffered on-road bike lanes on both sides of New Street.

The plan was to test the new lane configuration for one year allowing staff to determine the impacts and then follow-up with the scheduled resurfacing of New Street in this area that was proceeding in parallel. A report would have come to committee and council in September (there are no meetings in August when residents are on holiday).

As a result of changes in construction scheduling as well as the desire to collect complete data, staff propose that the report summarizing pilot results and public feedback be considered by Committee of the Whole on October 30, 2017 (roughly one month later than planned).

A summary of activities on this pilot project since it commenced last August is below.

Since early August, staff have been collecting traffic (vehicular volume, classification, speed and travel times) along both New Street and the parallel residential roads. Additionally, staff have been in receipt of extensive feedback from residents and have been actively documenting and responding to all comments, questions and concerns in regards to the pilot project.

However, staff weren’t able to collect vehicle travel times on New Street towards the end of 2016 and beginning of 2017, because the equipment used to collect travel times was solar powered and the batteries weren’t recharging properly. The equipment in place now is working properly and staff are currently collecting travel times, vehicle traffic, bike traffic and will continue to do so until the end of this pilot project.

Additionally, this spring and summer, staff will once again collect traffic on local roads such as Spruce/Rexway/Woodward. Staff will also find out how long it takes people to enter New Street from local streets and also get data on air quality for New Street. Discussions are currently underway with the Region of Halton’s health department since they have that equipment.

The existing contract currently underway for the New Street Reconstruction Project also included watermain and sanitary sewer replacements as part of the resurfacing works. With the reconstruction work on New Street proceeding ahead of schedule, the contractor was able to employ multiple crews at the end of 2016 to accelerate the watermain works between Guelph Line and Dynes Road and reduce the tendered construction schedule from 8 months to 3.5 months. While this work was originally scheduled for the Spring of 2017, staff were supportive of this as it would reduce the construction period and help minimize the impact and inconvenience to the public. This also allowed for the pilot data to be gathered uninterrupted for the majority of 2017 (May to Oct) as opposed to only Aug to Oct.

The works required to complete the remainder of the watermain installation between Dynes Road and Cumberland Avenue is projected to be complete by May 2017 (dependent upon weather conditions). To date, staff have not been able to collect data that represents the desired intent of the complete street pilot project - New Street without vehicle or bike lane closures. Given that the collection of accurate and representative data is of paramount importance to the outcome of this study, staff propose that the report summarizing pilot results and public feedback be considered by Committee of the Whole on October 30, 2017.This revised timeline would permit staff to continue to collect traffic data into the fall of 2017 under non-construction conditions in order to fully assess the pilot project. While this timing window is not ideal for construction, it should allow for an opportunity to complete the resurfacing project in the Fall of 2017 depending on contractor availability and weather conditions.

My Take:

There will be continued pressure in the city to add on-road bike lanes; the results of the pilot will put to rest whether or not these are successful, so we can move on to other priorities. From what I have heard so far from residents, there has been minimal increase in cycling (and many continue to ride on the sidewalk), the pilot has negatively impacted travel times, and added significant traffic on side streets where it was never intended to be. We will have some data in the fall to verify all this, but I give significant consideration to the real experiences as reported by residents, as well as the petition to end the pilot project. In making our decisions, we need to consider and balance the needs of all of our residents.
To date, I am inclined to agree the pilot has been a failure, and will be voting accordingly once we see all the feedback and results from the pilot in the fall.

Comment
Share Article
Tweet Article
Forward Article

Contact Me

Contact Me


Marianne Meed Ward 
City/Regional Councillor, Ward 2, Burlington 
marianne.meedward@burlington.ca 
905-335-7600, x 7588
905.220.5749 (mobile)


Facebook 
Twitter 
Website: ward2news.ca


Georgie Gartside 
Councillor's Assistant 
georgie.gartside@burlington.ca 
905-335-7600, ext. 7368 
Facsimile: 905-335-7881

To subscribe to the newsletter, email me at marianne.meedward@burlington.ca or signup here.

In Your Neighbourhood is a free community newsletter covering issues and events in Ward 2 and city-wide, and seeking your input in decision-making. You’re getting this because you signed up, a friend forwarded it, or as an introductory copy. Feel free to pass it on! Unsubscribe link below.
Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Twitter
Website
Website
Email
Email
Discussing school closure issues with AM900CHML's Bill Kelly.
Copyright © 2017 Ward 2 Burlington, All rights reserved.


unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences