The District's plan to clear-cut the majority of an environmentally sensitive site, including the destruction of a biologically diverse wetland, in order to build a large, 1600-student school (with 800 parking spaces (encouraging polluting behavior in students), a stadium, track, 3 ball fields, a practice field, 8 tennis courts) which will not reduce class size or deal with the student achievement gap. The site is eminently unwalkable, has vehicle access from only one road, is adjacent to a highway, and is in an area that is already congested and dangerous, even without student drivers. Well over 1700 cars will be added to the mix every morning between 7 and 8 am. Clearly the plan has more than a few problems that individually would be fatal flaws. The plan defies common sense.

That is why, instead of showing leadership in convincing Ann Arbor students and parents that this is not the best site, that another comprehensive school is not what Ann Arbor needs, the Superintendent is trying to implement a fatally flawed plan without addressing rational concerns and input. Because the plan is so clearly flies in the face of city planning, the Greenbelt initiative, teaching our students and community about the "right thing to do", preserving the environment, creating a safe educational environment, part of that implementation requires obfuscation.

Read this message from Superintendent George Fornero telling the voters about the plan that was to be on the June 14, 2004 ballot. See if you can find any mention of the location of the new high school, or any discussion of the layout, or the impact on traffic, safety, or environment.

Here is a link to the AAPS's Frequently Asked Questions about the plan, where the site is mentioned. You will see answers such as:

This site was chosen primarily because the district already owns it and it meets key criteria. The site has been thoroughly evaluated by experts including architects, engineers and construction professionals. Their consensus is that this location meets all major criteria, including:  educational programming, aesthetics, safety, air quality, noise, traffic, water, sewer, storm water, utilities, zoning and annexation. Site feasibility studies assure this project can be effectively and safely sited here within the bond and operating budget.

If that is the case,

• why was the site not mentioned in the ballot?
• the "thorough" evaluations and the feasibility studies were not done before the site was picked. Now, with only 3 days of counting cars, and a computer simulation that does not take into account any roads outside those that border the property on the west and south, the District is pretending all is well.
• why, during the August 16, 2004 meeting with residents, was there nothing more definite about road impact than terms such as: it's up to the Road Commission to determine whether Craig Road will need to be paved and perhaps some "vertical correction" of Maple Road will be necessary to correct safety concerns with speed and visibility on that road, etc.
• MDOT and WCRC are still considering what to do with this site. There have been no approvals yet.

Compare the current site with the "plan." To see what is gained and what it lost, keeping in mind the costs in terms of safety, traffic, and environment.

Before clear cutting.	After the auto loop and building replace the wetland with the endangered species.
Current natural site. Click to enlarge.	The site plan as approved at the 12/8/04 Board meeting.
The site plan as of 11/17/04. Click to enlarge.	The site plan as of 8/24/04. Click to enlarge.
	The first site plan. Click to enlarge.
Not much difference between the original and current plan.... No real changes have been made based on community input.

Read about the District's ongoing development of the plan and the rushed timeline.