Alternatives

The Superintendent said that the District considered other sites. Keep in mind that the District itself argues that building a large school is a bad idea. Several questions arise about alternatives considered and not considered. Wouldn't it be a good idea to brainstorm a bit about creative alternatives before access to 109 acres of environmentally valuable land is lost.

How many other sites did it consider and how seriously did it consider them?
- The Board's website mentions a site in Pittsfield and says the only major drawback was that it didn't already own the land. Surely, that is not an insurmountable problem.
- Any others? Why has no one ever seen the studies on these?
Has there been a complete survey (GIS, etc.) of possible alternative sites within the City that could be exchanged for the District's current proposed site?
The District says it only intends to use less than 65% of the land (65% of 109 acres).
- Why not consider selling the dubious, currently proposed site and use the funds to buy a total of about 65 acres, split into several smaller sites? Even if it is true (as the Board's web site states) that "the likelihood of selling any of the land is limited because of wetlands and other natural features," the District could consider selling the 65% of the land it is willing to develop.
- Why not consider exchanging this land for one, or more, sites within the City that would be better suited demographically and environmentally for a school? The City would increase its park land and the school would better serve the community.
Although the site was reviewed two years ago, the Greenbelt Advisory Commission was not in place at the time. In just a few months, the Greenbelt Acquistion Commission will be in a position to acquire land for the Greenbelt. The site on North Maple would be an excellent addition to the Greenbelt.
The AAPS should research the city's Geographic Information System to help find a different site.
What about the idea of non-"comprehensive" school where it's needed instead of a large one (the District doesn't like large schools), on an environmentally sensitive site that could be reserved for a major park, that will largely benefit the more affluent in the Ann Arbor community.

	Fighting Mismanagement in the Ann Arbor Public Schools District "If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about answers" — Thomas Pynchon

Main Archives Page (New High School) Environment Land Use Traffic School size Demographics Safety Archaeology Alternative sites In the News About CRS Write a letter ! Contact Us Home Page	Alternatives The Superintendent said that the District considered other sites. Keep in mind that the District itself argues that building a large school is a bad idea. Several questions arise about alternatives considered and not considered. Wouldn't it be a good idea to brainstorm a bit about creative alternatives before access to 109 acres of environmentally valuable land is lost. How many other sites did it consider and how seriously did it consider them? The Board's website mentions a site in Pittsfield and says the only major drawback was that it didn't already own the land. Surely, that is not an insurmountable problem. Any others? Why has no one ever seen the studies on these? Has there been a complete survey (GIS, etc.) of possible alternative sites within the City that could be exchanged for the District's current proposed site? The District says it only intends to use less than 65% of the land (65% of 109 acres). Why not consider selling the dubious, currently proposed site and use the funds to buy a total of about 65 acres, split into several smaller sites? Even if it is true (as the Board's web site states) that "the likelihood of selling any of the land is limited because of wetlands and other natural features," the District could consider selling the 65% of the land it is willing to develop. Why not consider exchanging this land for one, or more, sites within the City that would be better suited demographically and environmentally for a school? The City would increase its park land and the school would better serve the community. Although the site was reviewed two years ago, the Greenbelt Advisory Commission was not in place at the time. In just a few months, the Greenbelt Acquistion Commission will be in a position to acquire land for the Greenbelt. The site on North Maple would be an excellent addition to the Greenbelt. The AAPS should research the city's Geographic Information System to help find a different site. What about the idea of non-"comprehensive" school where it's needed instead of a large one (the District doesn't like large schools), on an environmentally sensitive site that could be reserved for a major park, that will largely benefit the more affluent in the Ann Arbor community.