The purpose of the Secondary School Facility Planning and Feasibility Study is to develop long-term plans for addressing capacity needs of the district’s middle schools and high schools.
Committees consisting of steering committee members and two representatives from each of the forty middle and high schools studied and discussed these pros and cons of the four potential options to address current and pending capacity needs. From these four options, over the next few weeks, the steering committee members will put together and recommend one (unchanged or modified) option to take to the public at the 3rd and final round of public input on Aug 23 and Aug 25 .
Based on 2022 Enrollment Projections
 |
|
| Pros | Cons |
| • Provides relief for projected over-capacity conditions at Dunwoody HS, Cross Keys HS, Lakeside HS, Clarkston HS, Lithonia HS, Chamblee MS, Peachtree MS, Sequoyah MS, Henderson MS and Freedom MS; • Eliminates 92 percent of current portable classrooms (60 of 64 total); • Uses existing site (Briarcliff) for new middle school • Relatively cost-efficient; • Would maintain one-to-one middle-to-high school feeder patterns where possible, except for Henderson MS; • Provides better balance of enrollment between middle schools and feeder high schools. |
• Would use most available E-SPLOST V funding for new facilities and additions, leaving limited funds to address additional elementary school needs; • Recommends new schools larger than DCSD standard for middle schools (1,200-seat) and high schools (1,600-seat). • Would not maintain one-to-one feeder pattern for Henderson MS (splits feed to Lakeside HS and New Sequoyah-area HS); • Provides only partial relief for over-capacity Chamblee HS; |
 |
|
| Pros | Cons |
| • Provides relief for projected over-capacity conditions at Dunwoody HS, Cross Keys HS, Lakeside HS, Clarkston HS, Lithonia MS & HS, Chamblee MS, Peachtree MS, Sequoyah MS, Henderson MS, Tucker MS & HS, Freedom MS and Miller Grove MS; • Eliminates 92 percent of current portable classrooms (60 of 64 total); • Minimizes attendance zone adjustments; • Relatively cost-efficient; • Recommends addressing needs at other schools using other E-SPLOST funds and funding beyond E-SPLOST; • Would maintain one-to-one middle-to-high school feeder patterns where possible; • Provides better balance of enrollment between middle schools and feeder high schools. |
• Would use most available E-SPLOST V funding for new facilities and additions, leaving limited funds to address additional elementary school needs; • Would not construct any new schools; • Cost-constrained due to limited E-SPLOST funding available; • Provides only partial relief for over-capacity Chamblee HS. |
 |
|
| Pros | Cons |
| • Provides relief for projected over-capacity conditions at Dunwoody HS, Cross Keys HS, Lakeside HS, Clarkston HS, Lithonia MS & HS, Chamblee MS, Chamblee HS, Peachtree MS, Sequoyah MS, Henderson MS, Tucker MS & HS, Freedom MS and Miller Grove MS; • Eliminates 92 percent of current portable classrooms (60 of 64 total); • Minimizes attendance zone adjustments; • Relatively cost-efficient; • Recommends addressing needs at other schools using other E-SPLOST funds and funding beyond E-SPLOST; • Would maintain one-to-one middle-to-high school feeder patterns where possible; • Provides better balance of enrollment between middle schools and feeder high schools; • Adds magnet programs to Southwest DeKalb HS cluster. |
• Would use most available E-SPLOST V funding for new facilities and additions, leaving limited funds to address additional elementary school needs; • Would not construct any new schools; • Relocates magnet programs away from Chamblee MS & Chamblee HS. |
 |
|
| Pros | Cons |
| • Best utilizes existing capacity by shifting students from overcrowded schools into schools where capacity exists; • Most cost-effective option; • Makes available at least one new middle school facility (Miller Grove) for school choice programs or other DCSD program needs; • Uses existing site (Briarcliff) for new middle school |
• Disrupts every cluster with attendance zone shifts at every middle school and every high school; • Loses MS-HS one-to-one feeders, and may lose some ESMS one-to-one feeders; • Does not provide complete relief for over-capacity schools; • Still would cost approximately $96 million. |
Pros & Cons
Planning and Feasibility Study Options
July 25, 2016 – Committees consisting of steering committee members and two representatives from each of the forty middle and high schools studied and discussed these pros and cons of the four potential options to address current and pending capacity needs.
Cost Estimates
Planning and Feasibility Study Options
July 20, 2016 – Based on 2022 enrollment projections, the Steering Committee discussed these Cost Estimates for the four potential options to address current and pending capacity needs.
DeKalb Secondary School Facility Planning and Feasibility Study
July 18, 2016 – The study will identify the challenges and opportunities facing each middle school and high school, determine options to address the needs identified, and prepare regional master plans to implement the options. Here are the problems, the funds and the options.
Chamblee Magnet Program – Is it moving?
July 13, 2016 – Any truth to the rumor of moving the magnet program from Chamblee Middle and Chamblee High? Steering committees discussed the pros and cons of the following four potential options to address current and pending capacity needs.
“Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.”