Should a new high school on Green Level Church Road in Cary or on Humie Olive Road in Apex be built first?
As noted in today's article, that's an issue facing Wake County school board members deciding how to use nearly $100 million in unspent bond money. The board could make the final call on Tuesday, which would also impact whether the district immediately starts work on a new elementary school in Wake Forest, a new elementary school in Wendell or a new middle school in northwest Raleigh.
As you guys may recall, staff had proposed in June two options for using bond savings and other cuts to fund some interim construction projects until the next bond issue goes forward.
Both of the first two options called for building the new high school in Cary. Another thing they shared is early starting a new elementary school off U.S. 1 in Wake Forest near the Franklin County border and a new elementary school by the North Wake Landfill in North Raleigh.
They differed in that one would have also built an elementary school on East Wake High's campus and the other a middle school on Leesville Church Road in northwest Raleigh.
Now jump ahead to the July 12 meeting where Don Haydon, chief facilities and operations officer, told the board that two questions facing Wake were leading to a new third option.
Haydon said one question is whether the need for more high school seats in western Wake was so great that they should build a bigger high school. The new school in Cary would hold 1,600 students while the one in Apex would hold 2,200 students.
Haydon said the other question is that with Wake moving to a choice plan, would parents send their children to an early-start school if there was no definite date when the campus would open? Under the first two options, funding for the early-start schools would depend on the next bond issue.
So under this new third option, Wake would build the larger high school in Apex. They'd still early-start the elementary school in Wake Forest but would also provide funding right now so parents would know when the campus would be ready.
The plan calls for holding off for a year the early-start of the North Wake Landfill school so that they'd have a better idea when the bond issue would be to tell parents when the permanent campus would open.
This third option, like the prior two, still keeps in place plans for the ninth-grade centers for Panther Creek and Garner high schools while providing modular units for Athens Drive, Holly Springs and Middle Creek high schools.
Under the first two options where the school in Cary was funded, it would open in 2014 with the school in Apex potentially opening in 2016 depending on the next bond issue. Under the third option, the school in Apex would open in 2015 with the school in Cary potentially opening in 2016 depending on the next bond issue.
School board member Debra Goldman objected to delaying the new high school in Cary, which is in her district. She argued that they they had told the public they'd build that school next and that it would allow them to relieve crowding at Cary High School.
“Are we going to wait till Cary High just implodes?" Goldman said. "What are we going to do there. Because the problem won’t go away by just waiting. It is not going to go away by stalling, building another high school in that Cary-Apex area."
Goldman pointed to how the middle section of Cary High's campus has been slated for demolition. Haydon said they had held off on the work because they needed to keep the space to house students.
School board chairman Ron Margiotta backed starting the new high school in Apex first saying it would relive crowding at more schools. The site in his district.
Margiotta said in an interview Wednesday that he felt the Panther Creek ninth-grade center would help the crowding there and at Cary High. But he said it won't help Apex High.
Margiotta said accelerating the new school in Apex would help Apex, Fuquay-Varina and Holly Springs high schools.
During the July 12 discussion, school board vice chairman John Tedesco argued they should reconsider the whole plan to put money into building schools in Southeast Raleigh.
Tedesco argued they need the additional capacity in Southeast Raleigh as a way to keep the magnet school program viable while still allowing families who live in that area to go to schools near where they live under the new choice plan.
"If you don’t build schools in Southeast Raleigh and you continue with a plan that’s only about proximity and choice, you’re going to limit your magnet seats and not have those seats anymore as an option down the road," Tedesco said. "So if you want to keep your magnet schools and your integration programs and you want to be responsive to parents who want neighborhood schools and proximity, you need to meet some of the capacity needs there now or you’re going to run into bigger problems."
Tedesco said he also wants to look at limiting the number of modular units that can be placed at a school campus and how large a percentage can be placed in non-permanent seats.
“I think it’s ridiculous that some of our schools have 40 to 50 mobile units with 30 percent of our student body in them," Tedesco said.
Also during the recent school board discussion, Goldman questioned why staff is still considering building an elementary school at the former Forest Ridge High site. The site on Forestville Road was originally planned for both a high school and elementary school before the board majority killed the high school in favor of building it in Rolesville.
Staff was told to try to sell the site. School board member Chris Malone argued they should just sell the site and abandon plans for any schools there.
Haydon said they had listed the elementary school, with a projected 2015 opening based on a future bond issue, because they still own the land. Wake could sell most of the site but still keep a small portion for the elementary school.
Margiotta said the three options will be discussed again at Tuesday's work session.
Click here for a PowerPoint showing capacity by region.
Click here for a handout summarizing how they'd fund the three options.
Click here for a handout showing the potential timelines for the three plans.
Comments
extravagance?
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 10:34 — hmoncelleHarry_Moncelle
Woody when and I you went to school is not relevant to the equity of educational opportunity afforded all students in Wake County Public Schools today. When I was in high school we only had four elements on the periodic table, ( earth, wind, water, and fire) LOL
Apex High was constructed in 1970, it does not provide the facilities offered to students who attend high schools a few miles north of the Apex Campus. I'm told the scheduled updates have been ignored at least two times by the leadership of the BoE. As an advocate for neighborhood schools, I know you believe that the students of Apex out and deserve equal facilities for fine arts, music, drama, as well as athletics. It is time for the representative of District 8 to advocate for students at Apex High School!
The wind is blowing in the direction of...
Sat, 07/30/2011 - 13:21 — paulastamRegardless of the many merits for building a new high school in Apex or Cary one would think that the gentleman that heads the GOP's cohort with majority control of the school board, and is up for re-election, will likely find that his district is the recipient of a new high school...
With 3,000 to 5,000 new students moving to this area each year, in part because of the wonderful reputation our local public schools have historically enjoyed, we clearly need several more schools to be built ACROSS the county.
Paula, "Independent, Fair & Speaking Up for MY Kids."
Maybe wait
Sat, 07/30/2011 - 16:02 — user12345As much as I support Apex HS getting an update I wonder if it is better to keep the wealthy and influential Apex voters on a string for a little longer. Once they get what they want, they may retire and not help fight to fund everyone else. By keeping them hungary for a few more years, those voters may eventually force the GOP to adequately fund the schools at least until they get served.
"Adequately funded? FYI -
Mon, 08/01/2011 - 08:03 — woodstock"Adequately funded?
FYI - From the 1991-92 school year to the 2004-05 school year, national K-12 education spending (accounting for enrollment increases and inflation) increased 105%.
Source: US Dept. of ED
So your point ?
Mon, 08/01/2011 - 20:52 — Solon77In 1991 a gallon of gasoline was $1,14 today it is $3.65 - 300% increase. A dozen eggs -$.85 today $1.85, 1lb Bacon - $1.99 - today - $5.00, loaf of Bread -$1.25, today $2.00+
I don't know anything about
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 10:59 — woodstockI don't know anything about updates being "ignored." That sounds unlikely, "delayed" is probably more accurate. However, I do agree that the Apex facilities need to be addressed. Moving forward the whole notion of expansive sports complexes that H.S. have become probably deserves some consideration. Sharing of facilities needs to at least be considered.
I think you are talking
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 13:49 — danofncI think you are talking about something you don't understand.
Holly Springs HS has the following sports:
Boys: JV and Varsity Soccer, JV and Varsity football, lacrosse, and outdoor track.
Girls: JV and Varsity soccer, lacrosse and track.
That's 10 sports that would be using the football field during the course of the year for games, practices, etc. The logistics of working out schedules with other schools for shared facilities would be a nightmare.
There is also baseball, and
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 14:36 — woodstockThere is also baseball, and tennis and other sports. All these facilities are used at most a few hours a day. In some circumstances they could be shared and the certainly could be better utilized, including allowing general public access when not in use by schools.
Also, don't most high schools have practice fields in addition to the stadium fields?
Are you really saying that school sports facilities are being maximized?
But, here is the bottom line, what should the priorities be? A whole lot of land is purchased for on-campus sports complexes in Wake County and the facilities are available to a minority of students for a few hours a day. Most of the time they sit unused. Considering the budget situation, shouldn't some consideration be given to maximizing the use of these valuable resources? Isn't that worthy of some discussion?
Any money saved by
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 15:35 — danofncAny money saved by consolidating tennis and baseball facilities would probably be lost in transportation and lighting expense. Not to mention that if you were using a public tennis facility for practice every day you'd likely run into trouble at some point. It's not like you can share facilities with a HS that the public can use, because you wouldn't want the public on campus during school hours.
A shared facility would require more maintenance. The increased traffic from the additional games and practices would cause turf problems that would have to be fixed (and could also cause injury).
Got it. I will put you down
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 23:27 — woodstockGot it. I will put you down as being against shared facilities or any discussion related to the possibility of shared facilities. Your opinion is duly noted.
You're wrong here. Between
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 15:20 — jeffrey1You're wrong here.
Between PE use and athletic use, most facilities get used quite a bit. See Page 30 (the 33rd page in the PDF file), entitled "Healthful Living vs. Athletic Use of Wake County School Facilities - High" of this report:
http://www.wakegov.com/NR/rdonlyres/E7B2D6CC-4462-4F75-B528-DC9F779398EB/0/cfacreport.pdf
Most facilities get 7 hours of use per day for PE, and an additional 3-5 hours of use for athletics.
Today, "state of the art facilities" and land can run about $13 million for a high school. While that may sound like a lot, I still maintain that overwhelming evidence suggests that the participation in sports has far reaching benefits - in the classroom and later in life, and the expeditures are well worth it.
Of that $13 million, the only thing that could really provide some cost savings is a shared stadium. But as Dan mentions, the stadium is used by football, soccer (men's and women's), track, lacrosse (men's and women's), as well as PE, and sharing a stadium with another school would result in scheduleing headaches.
Again, I agree with you
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 15:40 — woodstockAgain, I agree with you about sports... I like sports, I play sports, I coach sports and my children play sports. They are wonderful!!!! I am talking about the schools' role in providing all the facilities, the use of those facilitates and how they could be put to more efficient use. You are saying we max them out and there is no need to even discuss the matter. I disagree with that. Additionally, schools are not the only avenue for sports, the experience is available outside of school too.
OK, we agree about the
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 16:02 — jeffrey1OK, we agree about the benefits of sports programs.
With regard to utilization and costs, the district's own reports indicate that most facilities are heavily used. Do you have any suggestions to make them more efficient? With regard to cost, what are you going to cut? You're not suggesting that we build a school without gymnasiums, health classrooms, playing fields for PE classes, or locker rooms are you? Those things alone account for about 75% of all athletic facility costs. And most of the remaining costs are tied up in the football stadium, which needs to support as many as 6 different team sports. I just don't see any alternatives out there.
Additionally, schools are not the only avenue for sports, the experience is available outside of school too.
Besides some elite soccer teams, and some individual sports, very little is available to students at the high school level.
Let me try this. Leesville
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 16:39 — woodstockLet me try this. Leesville is an example of a well utilized facility... a high school, middle school and an elementary school using many shared sports facilities. Agree? (Still, I'd like to seem some more public access to the facilities during off hours and off season... they are public resources afterall.) What about nearby schools having separate practice fields and a shared stadium? Or building a public tennis facility next to a high school for shared school and general public use. Ditto for a soccer complex. It would take planning, but doesn't any of that makes sense to you?
Unless you're cutting them
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 15:42 — danofncUnless you're cutting them out everywhere, whether you think they belong in schools or not is immaterial.
School gets out at 2:30 or 3, right? So, there is a limited window for the sports teams to use the facilities anyway. It's not like the kids are going to get out of school at noon everyday to go to practice.
Here is what I am saying::
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 16:10 — woodstockHere is what I am saying:: Schools could use more public facilities -- keeping more limited education money in the facilitation of actual academic endeavors-- and the public could use the facilities when the school teams are not, such as during the day, in the evening, on weekends and when certain sports are not in season. This makes a lot of sense to me especially for baseball and tennis where rather specialized facilities are needed... and they are probably the least utilized. Think golf and cross country, HS golf and cross country teams use non-school public -- and private in some cases -- facilities.
Do you think that the town
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 16:20 — danofncDo you think that the town of Fuquay is going to maintain a baseball field for the sole purpose of having FVHS play there?
No town is going to give up the afternoons and evenings at their tennis and baseball facilities for 3 months at a time. I don't think there is a baseball facility in FV that isn't used at least 4 nights a week by FVAA teams in the spring and fall.
The unfettered access that having the fields/courts on campus gives the coaches (which you consider inefficient) is precisely the reason that having the courts/fields on campus is necessary.
I think coaches are
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 16:42 — woodstockI think coaches are inefficient? Where did you get that? I love coaches.
You think having facilities
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 16:49 — danofncYou think having facilities on-campus is inefficient.
Yes, some (NOT
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 23:22 — woodstockYes, some (NOT ALL) on-campus facilities are inefficient use of funds.
Do you think that the town of Fuquay is going to maintain a baseball field for the sole purpose of having FVHS play there?
Please say you are kidding. No, the town of Fuquay is not going to maintain a baseball field for the sole purpose of having FVHS play there; that is not the point. My point is, FOR EXAMPLE, the facility -- or baseball field in this case -- WILL NOT just be used soley by a high school. It would be open for general public use AND high school use.
Is this really such a difficult concept to grasp?
Um...
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 07:23 — Bob_SconceHgh school fields are also used by more than just the high school.
But, I do think that configurations like the Sanderson/Optimist Park and Millbrook/Millbrook Exchange Park where the athletic fields are actually part of the park, and not part of the school, seem to work quite well. IIRC, though, those examples both occurred pre-merger, so the same set of taxpayers was approving the bonds.
So, the concept I was
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 14:26 — woodstockSo, the concept I was proposing have been done and does work. Why not do more of it?
I don't understand the push back from some; it a very reasonable thing for our municipal and BoE leaders to consider.... and apparently they have in the past.
There's a football field, 6
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 17:38 — danofncThere's a football field, 6 tennis courts, and a baseball (or softball) field at Millbrook HS that don't look like part of Millbrook Exchange Park. MEP actually has a tennis center with almost 2 dozen courts and another 2 or 3 baseball fields.
Connected doesn't necessarily mean connected.
Schools have swim teams...I don't know of any schools with a pool. No school operates a golf course. They do share facilities.
North Raleigh Schools
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 09:56 — aacismeI am asking these questions in all seriousness.
What am I missing with the NRal ES by the North Wake Landfill? Isn't that on Durant Rd near an existing school? Why would they build one so close? Is capacity that limited there?
Also with the MS at Leesville Church Rd - The other Northern Raleigh MS (Millbrook and Carol) continue to be underenrolled. Wouldn't this school mostly serve the Leesville community and then leave LS MS underenrolled?
What am I missing with these discussions?
Thanks.
In North Raleigh, WCPSS
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 10:20 — danofncIn North Raleigh, WCPSS probably builds where they can get the most affordable land, even if it's not in what they'd consider an "ideal" location.
Another alternative....
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 09:50 — Bob_SconceBuild two smaller high schools without additional facilities for competitive sports like football, baseball and tennis, but still with sufficient facilities for PE classes, significantly shrinking the schools' footprints. Instead of competitive sports, offer enhanced academic and arts opportunities at those schools, and allow families to go there by choice. They'd be trading off the chance to play those sports for other benefits.
After start-up costs, are
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 10:23 — danofncAfter start-up costs, are athletics really that expensive to the district? Don't the schools (through booster groups and event admissions) cover a lot of the expense?
If you offer enhanced academics, couldn't that end up being more expensive? I don't think anyone would show up to watch an AP teacher teach. Besides...aren't most HS already offering 15-20 AP classes? How much more enhanced can academics get?
All good questions
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 10:37 — Bob_SconceAnd, I don't know the answers to them (but, see below). I'm just trying to think outside the box.
My thought was that land for high schools is usally a big expense, because the parcel needs to be large. On top of that, Stadiums are expensive. I know that, for example, RCHS would not be able to do what it does if it required tens of acres for athletic fields.
As to 'how much more enhanced can academics get,' I don't think that's something you can reasonably measure by the number of AP courses because the course list is limited to those developed by the college board, and that list is biased toward breadth and not depth.
In the last week or so, there was a Letter to the Editor from a WCPSS Physics teacher, complaining about how the current grading system encourages students to take a wide breadth of AP courses in lieu of more depth in a smaller number of areas. Here's an easy example: It's possible for high school kids to take Differential Equations, which is a very sophisticated math course that's typically taught in the 2nd or 3rd year of college. Yet, Diff. Eq., at most, only counts as an honors course, and gets 5 points. As a result, students are given an incentive to take an AP course they don't care for instead of an honors class that they do -- instead of Diff. Eq's, they take, say, AP Geography, even though they may have no interest in AP Geography.
Future schools share existing park/rec space
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 13:28 — RKCurtrightEveryI appreciate the decision for continued community school concept for Athens Drive.
I appreciate the decision for continued community school concept for Athens Drive. I appreciate the decision for continued community school concept for Athens Drive.
I appreciate the decision for continued community school concept for Athens I appreciate the decision made on usually BOE to continue the partnership at Athens High and the City Recreational space they share. This was voted "yes" by all 9 board member, right? Consensus is possible. This is a good example of where the BOE needs to commit to this concept for future schools. Look at the possibility of shared space in existing schools and community centers, parks, recreational facilities.
Consensus might be found in every BOE candidate running for a seat in October. Get the public hopeful and excited about changes that we all can agree to and maybe the public will get more involved , be more receptive, and begin trusting wcpss is in good hands. Mr. Burns had an audit done and one recommendation was that we find ways to save in building new schools with the question of do we need to build every sport field and stadium at every school?
Libraries are a great example as well of using shared media. For example Leesville Elementary is one of many that has a new Public Library that kids could walk to. The future of technology, computers and library need to be combined now into one. This will save on space.
How many of our Wake County Public schools have this type of community school partnership? Should this be done whenever possible with new school being built so money is saved where ever possible to go toward all the need of new schools, improvements at older schools, etc . There are needs all over Wake County so savings need to be made now.
Even if transportation is needed, it seems a win-win in many saving and utilization of existing resources for city and school systems. And some schools could walk( walking field trips) to these park and rec. centers if less than .75 miles away.
1. Brier Creek Elementary: built on shared space that houses a community center the school uses each day.
2.Athen Drive has a stadium, walking trails, parking, and Public library as well, right?
3. Lynn road: Built on shared Park land
4. Barwell Elementary built with Barwell Community Center
List of existing facilities that could share space with Cary Community Center 101 Wilkinson Avenue, Cary, NC - (919) 460-4965
Schools within walking distance:
Cary Elementary 400 Kildaire Farm Road (.50 miles)
Kingswood 200 E. Johnson St.(.56 miles)
Northwoods Elementary 8850 Chapel Hill Road (.67 miles)
Middle Creek Community Center
www.townofcary.org – 123 Middle Creek Park Ave, Apex, NC -
(919) 771-1295
Middle Creek 110 Middle Creek Park Ave. (.07 miles)
West lake Elementary 4500 West Lake Road (.53 miles)
Bond Park Community Center
Apex Community Center
53 Hunter Street Apex, NC 27502 (919) 249-3402
Baucom 400 Hunter Street(.32 miles)
Holly Springs Community Center
301 Stinson Avenue Holly Springs, NC 27540 (919) 557-9600
Holly Grove 1451 Avent Ferry Road (1.53 miles)
Holly Ridge 900 Holly Springs Road (1.65 miles)
Holly Springs 401 Holly Springs Road ( 1.08 miles)
Hunt Community Center Holly Springs
YMCA
www.ymcatriangle.org - 1701 Aversboro Road, Garner, NC - (919) 773-3621
www.ymca.net - 2235 Garner Road, Raleigh, NC - (919) 833-1256
Panther Branch Community Center in Garner, NC 27529
Rolesville Community Center. 514 Southtown Cir, Rolesville, NC, 27571
Morrisville Aquatics and Fitness Center - Morrisville, NC ...
Cedar Fork Community Center • Citizen Advisory Committees ... Morrisville, NC 27560. Ph: 919.463.6900 919.463.6900. Fx: 919.380.6709.
1050 Town Hall Dr # B, Morrisville, NC
(919) 463-7100
Morrisville Community Center
Fuquay Varina Community Center
820 South Main Street
Fuquay-Varina, NC 27526-2419
(919) 552-1430
Athens Drive Community Library 1420 Athens Drive
Raleigh, NC 27606
Combs ES 2001 Lorimer Road (1.10 miles)
Cameron Village Regional 1930 Clark Ave.
Raleigh, NC 27605
Wiley ES 301 St. Mary's Street (.64 miles)
Partnership 601 Devereux Street (.67 miles)
Cary Public Library
Cary ES 400 Kildaire Farm Road (.07 miles)
Northwoods
Kingswood 200 E. Johnson St.(.98 miles)
Duraleigh Road Library
East Regional Libray 109 Ridge Street
Express Library 336 Fayetteville St.
Raleigh, NC 27601
Moore Square middle 301 S. Person (.32 miles)
Eva H. Perry Regional 2100 Shepherd's Vineyard Drive
Apex, NC 27502
Fuquay Varina Library
Lincoln Heights ES 307 Bridge Street (
Green Road Library
Holly Springs Library 300 W. Ballentine St.
Holly Springs, NC 27540
Holly Springs ES 401 Holly Springs Road (.80 miles)
Leesville Community Library 5105 Country Trail Raleigh, NC 27613
Leesville Elementary 8401 Leesville Road (1.02 miles)
North Regional Library 7009 Harps Mill Road
North Ridge ES 7120 Harps Mill Road (.21 miles)
Raleigh, NC 27615
Olivia Raney Local History 4016 Carya Drive
Raleigh, NC 27610
Bugg 825 Cooper Road
Southeast Raleigh Regional
908 Seventh Ave.
Garner, NC 27529
Vandora Springs (.77 miles)
Southgate Library
1601-14 Cross Link Road
Raleigh, NC 27610
Fuller elementary
Wake Forest Branch Library
400 E. Holding Ave.
Wake Forest, NC 27587
Wendell Branch Library
207 S. Hollybrook Road
Wendell, NC 27591
Wendell ES ( .71 miles)
West Regional Library
4000 Louis Stephens Drive
Cary, NC 27519
Carpenter ES(.35 miles)
Green hope ES
Zebulon Branch Libray 1000 Dogwood Drive
Zebulon, NC 27597
Zebulon ES
Visit your local library!:
Athens Drive Community
Cameron Village Regional
Cary Public Library
Duraleigh Road Library
East Regional Library
Exp Library Fayetteville St
Eva H. Perry Regional
Fuquay-Varina Library
Green Road Library
Holly Springs Library
Leesville Community Library: Leesville Road ES, Hilburn ES
North Regional Library
Olivia Raney Local History
Richard B. Harrison
Southeast Regional
Southgate Branch Library
Wake Forest Branch
Wendell Branch Library
West Regional Library
Zebulon Branch Library
Barwell Road: Located off of Rock Quarry and Poole Road in Southeast Raleigh.
Phone: (919) 329-5994
Address: 3935 Barwell Rd, 27610
Director: Tori Voska
Assistant Director: Nick Sadler
Hours: Monday-Friday 7am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center
Barwell Elementary
Biltmore Hills: Southeast Raleigh
Phone: (919) 831-6895
Address: 2615 Fitzgerald Drive 27610
Director: Kenny Lyons
Assistant Director: Kaylah Nance
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Tennis Courts, Pool, Play Equipment, Outdoor Basketball, Picnic Shelters, Handicap Accessible
East Garner Elementary 5545 Jones Sausage Road Garner
Washington Elementary 1000 Fayetteville Street (2.36 miles)
Brier Creek:
Phone: (919) 420-2340
Address: 10810 Globe Road 27617
Director: Laura Brannon
Assistant Director: Robert Stewart
Hours: Monday-Friday 7am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center
Carolina Pines:
Phone: (919) 831-6435
Address: 2305 Lake Wheeler Rd. 27603
Director: Tonya McNeil
Assistant Director: Nickey Brewster
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Tennis Courts, Play Equipment, Handicap Accessible, Picnic Shelter
Chavis: Southeast Raleigh, adjacent to downtown
Phone: (919) 831-6989
Address: 505 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. 27601
Director: Al Byrd
Assistant Director: Denise Saunders
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Allan Herschell Carousel, Lighted Ball Fields, Tennis Courts, Outdoor Track, Pool, Play Equipment, Picnic Shelter, Greenway Trail, Handicap Accessible
Fuller Elementary - Magnet 806 Calloway Drive ( 1.33 miles)
Hunter Elementary Msgnet 1018 E. Davie Street ( 1.47 miles)
Poe Elementary 400 Peyton Street ( 1.87 miles)
Washington Elementary 1000 Fayetteville Street (.79 miles)
Green Road: Green Road between Millbrook Road and New Hope Church Road.
Phone: (919) 872-4140
Address: 4201 Green Road 27604
Director: Dan Bagley
Assistant Director: Ryan Vinson
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Outdoor Basketball, Sand Volleyball, Tennis Courts, Handicap Brentwood Elementary - Magnet 3426 Ingram Drive (.75 milrds)
Wilburn Elementary3851 Spring Forest Road (1.71 miles)
Greystone Recreation Center: Located in Greystone Village Shopping Center
Phone: (919) 996-4848
Address: 7713-55 Lead Mine Rd. 27615
Director: Kelly Ybarra
Center Hours: Monday - Friday 9am - 7pm, Saturday 9am - 3pm, Sunday closed
Indoor Playground Hours: Monday - Friday 9am - 11am, 12:30pm-5pm, Saturday 9am - 12pm
Park Amenities: Center, Indoor Playground, Classrooms
Leadmine elementary 8301 Old Leadmine Road (.45 miles)
Halifax: 3.9 acre site just behind Peace Collage
Phone: (919)831-6378
Address: 1015 Halifax St. 27604
Director: Chris Moore
Hours: Monday-Friday 2pm-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Play Equipment, Outdoor Basketball, Handicap Accessible
Conn ES 1220 Brookside Drive ( 1.07 miles)
Partnership 601 Devereux Street ( 1.00 miles)
Jaycee:
Phone: (919) 831-6833
Address: 2405 Wade Ave, 27607
Director: Dan Bacon
Assistant Director: Alicia Lacombe
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Tennis Courts, Sand Volleyball
Lake Lynn
Phone: (919) 870-2911
Address: 7921 Ray Rd, 27613
Director: Kira Stewart
Assistant Director: Chris Nadeau
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Tennis Courts
Laurel Hills
Phone: (919) 420-2383
Address: 3808 Edwards Mill Road, 27612
Director: Cindy Williams
Assistant Director: Linda Stafford
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Play Equipment, Outdoor Basketball
Lions: off of Capital Boulevard
Phone: (919) 831-6995
Address: 516 Dennis Ave. 27604
Director: Christie Jones
Assistant Director: Jason Clemmons
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Tennis Courts, Play Equipment, Outdoor Basketball, BMX Track, Handicap Accessible, Picnic Shelter
Marsh Creek Center: Located on N New Hope Road between Marsh Creek Road and Buffaloe Road.
Phone: (919) 996-4920
Address: 3050 N New Hope Rd 27604
Director: Heather O'Brien
Assistant Director: Shadu Jackson
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Ballfield, Picnic Shelter, In-line Hockey Rink, Skate Park, Play Equipment, Handicap Accessible
Method:
Phone: (919) 831-6066
Address: 514 Method Rd. 27607
Director: Val Brown
Assistant Director: Vacant
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Ball Field, Tennis Courts, Play Equipment, Outdoor Basketball, Picnic Shelter, Handicap Accessible
Millbrook Exchange: between Fire Station #15 and Millbrook High School.
Phone: (919) 872-4156
Address: 1905 Spring Forest Rd. 27615
Director: Billy Aubut
Assistant Director: Staci Sawyer
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Tennis Courts, Pool, Play Equipment, Outdoor Basketball, Picnic Shelter, Greenway Trail, Handicap Accessible
Optimist:
Phone: (919) 870-2880
Address: 5900 Whittier Drive
Director: Susan Adams
Assistant Director: David Edge
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Lighted Ball Fields, Tennis Courts
Peach Road: S. Saunders
Phone: (919) 807-8545
Address: 911 Ileagnes Road, 27603
Director: Christy Murray
Hours: Monday-Friday 2pm-8pm, Saturday 11am-5pm
Park Amenities: Neighborhood Center, Multipurpose Field, Picnic Shelter, Outdoor Basketball Courts, Play Equipment, Outdoor Handball Court, Handicap Accessible
Pullen Community Center: in the Apollo Heights Community, off of Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd.
Phone: (919) 831-6052
Address: 408 Ashe Avenue 27606
Director: Anita Spencer
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Handicap Accessible
Ralph Campbell:
Phone: (919) 250-2757
Address: 756 Lunar Dr. 27610
Director: Rickey Fowler
Hours: Monday-Friday 2pm-8pm, Saturday 11am-5pm, Sunday Closed
Park Amenities: Community Center, Outdoor Basketball, Handicap Accessible, Picnic Shelter
Roberts: Southeast Raleigh
Phone: (919) 831-6830
Address: 1300 E. Martin Street
Director: Sherri Hartsfield
Assistant Director: Vacant
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Ballfield, Outdoor Basketball Court, Picnic Shelter, Tennis Courts, Play Equipment
Sanderford Road : in Southgate Park in Southeast Raleigh
Phone: (919) 831-1898
Address: 2623 Sanderford Road
Director: Tori Spaugh
Hours: Monday-Friday 2-8 pm, Saturday 11am-5pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Shelter, Playground, Ball Fields, Outdoor Basketball Court, Tennis Courts, Handicap Accessible
Sgt. Courtney T. Johnson Center:
Phone: (919) 831-6719
Address: 1801 Proctor St
Director: Grady Bussey
Hours: Monday-Friday 2-8 pm, Saturday 11am-5pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Handicap Accessible
Tarboro Road: on the edge of downtown Raleigh
Phone: (919) 831-6505
Address: 121 North Tarboro Rd. 27610
Director: Felicia Lucas
Assistant Director: Zach Cheek
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Tennis Courts, Play Equipment, Picnic Shelter, Handicap Accessible
Top Greene:
Phone: (919) 831-6527
Address: 401 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd
Director: Grady Bussey
Hours: Monday-Friday 2-8 pm, Saturday 11am-5pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Handicap Accessible
Worthdale
Phone: (919) 250-2730
Address: 1001 Cooper Road, 27610
Director: Carletta Moore
Assistant Director: Kevin Sanders
Hours: Monday-Friday 10am-9pm, Saturday 9am-3pm, Sunday 1pm-6pm
Park Amenities: Community Center, Tennis Courts, Play Equipment
Information overload. And a
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 16:24 — danofncInformation overload.
And a lot of it seems quite useless.
I don't know how far it is from Lincoln Heights to the FV library, but it is not walkable. Not at all.
An "academically enhanced"
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 10:58 — danofncAn "academically enhanced" school wouldn't address the situation you talk about in your last paragraph.
The new school would have the same dynamic as the old when it came to AP/non-AP classes and how they figure into GPA. If it was changed for the new school, it would change everywhere. I don't see how the football team is keeping kids out of Differential Equations anymore than I see how not having a football team would put more kids into DE.
The grading system would still be the same.
I agree
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 14:56 — Bob_SconceTHe football team doesn't have anything to do with the AP/non-AP issues. That was just a tangent, since you brought up AP classes.
Anyway, I'd think that the school should also have a different grading scheme. Why would doing that mean having to change everywhere? (And, for that matter, would that be a bad thing?) In my view, the better approach for AP/Honors classes would be:
Honors: x1.25 (currently +1)
AP: x1.5 (currently +2)
High-level Honors: x1.5 (currently +1)
And have a maximum on the number of advanced/honors courses a student could take each year, to ensure that students don't try to protect their GPA by avoiding arts courses.
That approach would force students to think about whether they would really do well in the advanced classes.
I think the method for
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 15:39 — danofncI think the method for computing GPA is consistent throughout the county, and I don't think it should differ from school to school.
I also believe that for most kids the lure of the advanced classes is a combination of the AP status and the bump in GPA. I think it would be a leap to build a school centered around the idea that students would want to take classes harder than the APs that wouldn't result in an opportunity for college credits.
duplicate
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 08:58 — woodstockduplicate
Hey School Baord listen up!
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 08:36 — hmoncelleHarry_Moncelle
Before new construction is initiated the question arises...When is the school board going to fund the completion of Apex High School? As it stand now all of the volley ball and basketball games are held in an instructional gym with inadequate seating and a very low ceiling. At this writing, Apex has no tennis courts, twelve more mobile classrooms now stand where the tennis court were located. The auditorium that was planned to be built at Apex is still on somebody's drawing board while Apex fine arts, band, orchestra, and drama productions, and drama classes must be held in a lecture hall that seats 300 people.
Apex is looking at a freshmen class of unusual proportions for the 2011-2012 school year which will increase the overcrowding at APEX HIGH, students and parents of Apex deserve better! When will they get the construction remedy that has continually been postponed and apparently forgotten by the leadership of our school board? Why has unfinished construction at Apex High School been abandoned by the school board?
Agree on Apex HS
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 09:07 — ApexRes98Apex HS desperately needs some attention, but I don't know how that would work when it's so crowded. Build the school on Humie Olive first. It's larger and in a better location to pull kids from Panther Creek (half the neighborhoods on Olive Chapel Rd), Apex and Holly Springs HS where the current Humie Olive residents are assigned.
Very prudent of
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 08:59 — woodstockVery prudent of you. Let's put tennis and volley ball courts at the top of the priority list during an unprecedented budget crisis that is hitting municipalities locally and across the nation. Great idea!
Good for you, I expect you
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 09:12 — CaryCurmudgeonGood for you, I expect you will lead the charge to ensure that those new schools are also built with no tennis courts or gymnasium. Really, those schools don't need a football field either since we're in a budget crisis, and a baseball field should be out of the question too, right?
Your mantra of fiscal doom is getting old. Actually, it got old a while ago. These kids only go through high school once in their lives. They deserve the same high school experience that the rest of us got, and shouldn't have to forfeit that because a few penny-pinching ideologues like you aren't willing to spend what it takes. County employees just got 2% raises, Thom Tillis's staff just got huge raises (I read the Elephant Express rationalization, it was bs), and the legislature is busy working on abortion legislation instead of spending that time finding more money for schools. The money to pay for a retrofit is there, it is simply a matter of prioritization.
Evidently your children don't have the athletic ability to play high school sports, otherwise I think you'd see this differently.,
LOL, dude
"Your mantra of fiscal doom
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 09:26 — woodstock"Your mantra of fiscal doom is getting old. Actually, it got old a while ago."
Yeah, our free spending Presidents feels the same way. He likes to put his head in the sand and pretend there is no crisis too. "Old" or not, it does not change the reality.
FYI Regarding your crass comment about my children, they do indeed have the athletic ability to play... and they have and they do. I also recoginize the value and importance of sports, but that does not mean you spend irresponsibly. Plus, it is my understanding that no students at Apex H.S. is denied access to sports -- accommodations are provided -- so your point is baseless.
Head in the sand
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 21:05 — Solon77Yeah, our free spending Presidents feels the same way.
You mean the former president Bush and the GOP - right ? The same President who added 7 TRILLION to the deficit in 8 years through two wars, tax cuts and Medicare Part D. To use baseball rules Bush is the pitcher of record and is still responsible for the runners on base - TRILLIONs being spent on two wars, tax breaks and Medicare Part D.
You may want to change your news source away from Hannity and get a dose of reality.
?
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 22:08 — Bob_SconceI don't know where you get $7T from -- it appears to be a bit over $2T: http://www.davemanuel.com/history-of-deficits-and-surpluses-in-the-united-states.php
I agree, though, that Medicare Part D was a mistake. As to the wars, the D's were in full agreement on the Afghanistan war.
However, the biggest cause of deficits or surpluses is the state of the economy, and I think people severely overestimate the President's ability to positively affect that.
Bush Budget
Thu, 07/28/2011 - 22:43 — Solon77Bush kept the wars and other items off the books and not part of the official budget. As a finance guy I can make the P&L pretty much look like what you want it to - what I can't mess with is cash. Cash is cash. You don't really believe Bush went to the well 7 times out of his 8 years for a few billion here and there. Below is from the Treasury Dept. And yes I hold Bush accountable for the unfunded cost of the wars until all of the troops are home
The truth if you can handle it
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 08:48 — Voice_of_Reason_You may blame the Republicans all you want, and yes to some extent I agree that they are part of the problem but only a part. Bush's wars were approved by Democrats as well so don't blame him entirely. IMHO, as a military man, I think the wars that involve nation building in an irrational society are misguided. We spent a whole bunch of blood and treasure for a long term losing cause. The money would have been better spent attacking the military and political infra-structure of Iran where the real problem was (and is) and you would of got a huge amount of Arab support (Arabs don't really like Persians). The Afghanistan war was justified, but we should of withdrawn and let them lick their wounds and think about their actions. Iraq was caused by Bush #1 not completing the job the first time, that's the real cause. But our money (really spending) problems are rooted pre-Reagan. As Bob Sconce said, LBJ (war on poverty) and FDR (the new deal) are the root of that and the Dems have continued to increase those programs out of their original scope to curry favor and votes. Bush #2 made it worse (with Democratic support) adding the prescription drug program. These programs have bankrupted this country because they are failures and promises that were made based on false premises and delusion. Add to that the federal worker retirement system (post unionization) and the affordable housing Act and we are in the state we are in now. The Progressive movement's stink is on every one of these programs. So maybe we need a change, but more failed Progressive programs is not the way to real progress, they lead us is toward slavery to the government. Limited federal government and less entitlements is the way to go.
What was Obama's original solution to the current debt crisis? It was more spending and a blank check on raising the debt. Even the Democratic party could not stomach that. So here we are today. [If I were you I would prepare for a rough ride ahead].
Social Security
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 13:42 — Solon77You and Bob may want to take a harder look at Social Secuity. The reality is that Social Secuity is self funding through payroll taxes. Over the years contributions have far outstripped the benefits paid out creating an accumulated surplus of $2.6T. But where is is ? The government has used this surplus to fund other programs. Now that the baby boomers are retiring and more of the surplus is being used, the government can't borrow from Social Security anymore. Had Social Secuity been truly separated and the general fund had not been allowed to borrow from it - the general budget / revenue deficit would need to have been addressed sooner. I am for a truly separate Trust Fund for Social Securty, not allowing it to be raided by the general fund and the American people fess up to funding the General Fund on it's own merits. This is why 401k and other pension plans that employees contribute to are held separate from a company. The company has 30-60 days of so to fund their part of the conntribution. Federal and State retirement systems should have the similar rules - fund the commitments.
With regards to the wars - the point is they were not funded. Expenditure without revenue = deficit. The only way to cover a deficit is to borrow. It is as simple as that.
So....
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 15:00 — Bob_SconceThere is a paper surplus of about $2.6, but as you correctly point out, the government has spent that on other programs. The net effect has been to make the annual budget deficit appear to be smaller, because money "borrowed" from the trust fund isn't included in the deficit.
In any case, though, I was referring to the unfunded future liabilities of the system. As you probably know, there was a $49B Social Security deficit last year, and a $46B projected deficit for this year. Social Security's unfunded liabilities are currently projected at $21T; Medicare's is at about $25T. http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2011-06-06-us-debt-chart-medicare-social-security_n.htm
The big problem with keeping the money separate is that it has to go someplace, but where? Should we be buying sovereign debt from other companies? How about making investments in the stock market? (Apart from GM, does any company really want the federal government owning any part of its stock? Can you imagine the fiddling that the Congress would do: "Mr. CEO: I see that the social security trust fund owns 15% of your company, and that you elected to put a factory in Mexico last year."
Personally, I'd favor a plan where the gov't never gets its hands on it -- let me decide where to invest it.
Very True about Social Security
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 14:43 — Voice_of_Reason_Who started robbing that fund???, P.S. It wasn't Bush. That money should never had been touched. But even if it wasn't, the money would have run out before all the baby boomers were dead.
As far as the wars, it's only a small part of the national debt. As I said, I was not for nation building, we should of been out long ago.
And if you want to know another problem, maybe the biggest, is baseline spending. It is the number one reason the federal government is growing and accounts for a lot of waste. It drove me crazy when I was in the military. The end of the fiscal year was like Christmas, not to the taxpayers though....so much unneeded stuff was bought. It the same in every government agency.
Robbing the fund ??
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 20:02 — Solon77Who started robbing the fund ? Can't say but it has been perpetuated by all 12 presidents since Roosevelt. 6-D and 6-R.
With regards to social security and medicare - the problem has been that contributions have not risen with the costs. BC/BS has no problems raising premiums, Life Insurance companies have no problem raising premiums rates. So why is it the big stink over raising SS or Medicare rates ? Because it is a government program and touted as a tax increase ? Pooling risk is an effective way of providing the maximum benefit at the lowest possible cost. It is how insurance companies work. The issue with taxes is not how much you pay but whether you are getting the value for what you pay.
With regards to spending waste - I agree with your comment on the military. We have a small gov't contract and our Contracts Manager is ex Air Force contracting officer and he was telling me on a recent trip that a Contracting Officer's job is to spend the budget - full stop. Which is why we should cut the military budget by 50%.
That contracting officer was telling you the truth
Fri, 07/29/2011 - 22:35 — Voice_of_Reason_That is baseline budgeting and is throughout the government, not just the military. The biggest sin you can do in the government is not to spend all of your money. If you do, your next year budget will be cut. Money comes in all kinds of "colors", it is only at the end of the fiscal year that different "color" money can be transfered. "Color" means it is designated for a single purpose (e.g travel or office supplies). Money that is saved at higer levels flows down to lower levels at the end of the fiscal year too. To make it worse, every year there is an automatic 8% added to the budget to you must spend in order to continue getting it. YES THIS IS STUPID and extremely wasteful. If we just stopped the increase each year we would go a long way to balance the budget in a short time. You could cut 10% off every government department and really do very little to reduce services (including the military). The Democrats scream even if you try to reduce the 8% growth and come out saying the Republicans are making severe cuts and wanting to end life as we know it. The press falls in line and people like you believe Republicans are cutting. The truth is neither party has even made a reasonable proposal to cut government. The Republicans for the most part have only tried to slow growth of government. The Tea Party Republicans are breaking ranks and trying to cut.
Raising SS or Medicare rates have been historically fought by Democrats. They say it is an unfair tax and only want to tax the rich more. The Republicans don't believe in Socialism (AKA Wealth redistribution) and think everyone needs to pay their fair share into this. What do you think about the Earned Income Tax Credit? This give the money back that the lower income pay into these programs. Is that fair????
EIC - Is that fair ??
Sat, 07/30/2011 - 08:37 — Solon77I see it as the gov't trying to level the playing field. I do not necessarily agree with it just like I don't agree with a 15% rate for HedgeFund earnings. The real issue is the demise of the middle class and the increased concentration of wealth in the very few. Don't say they create jobs because they don't - it is parked in some "investment" and churns away - trillions of cash just sitting around. Put that cash in the hands of the middle class and they will buy stuff - creating demand and more jobs. Ford had the right idea - increase the wages of the factory worker and I will sell more cars. My company had record earning again this last quarter and has a boat load of cash - and the word is things are tight - no spending and certainly no hiring. There is a tendency to pick one thing out - like the EIC, while ignoring the reason why it is there to begin with. I would love to see these people able to make a decent wage
Solon77 in case you haven't looked
Sat, 07/30/2011 - 17:04 — Voice_of_Reason_Most of that middle class "stuff " is made in China these days. And that boatload of cash is not being spent because of the uncertainty of government regulation that the Obama administration is piling on on top of the slow economy. People need jobs, decent wages come from hard work and justifying those wages to the company (i.e. earning your keep). Corporations are in business to turn a profit, not make workers plush with cash unless they earn it. Salary is a supply and demand thing. I am not going to hire someone at $20/hr when I can hire two at $10. If they work hard, I might raise their salary to keep them. When you hire somebody you pay them for what they know, how much that knowledge is worth to you and how hard they will work for you; basically how much they "bring to the table". Government regulations burden employers by robbing them of capital they COULD use to hire more people.