It's Our City is a project that uses TV, Radio and Web
to promote civic engagement in the Philadelphia region.Is there ever a good place to put an alternative school for troubled kids?
Monday, August 3rd, 2009 at 5:22 pm - by Guest Commentator. Filed under: Community.
Graduating senior from DVHS / Scene from promotional video
By Andrew Thompson
Opponents to an alternative high school for troubled teens in the East Falls section of Philadelphia should not all be written off as NIMBY reactionaries.
A recent public hearing between the private school operator Delaware Valley High School (DVHS) and local residents brought out a host of concerns. In a recent Philadelphia Inquirer story, it reported that members of the East Falls Development Corporation expressed concerns that DVHS’ proposed high school on 4300 Ridge Ave (map). for 400 at-risk youth, would discourage developers from entering the area and take up prime real estate.
The school would be built near Falls Bridge along the Schuylkill River
What many people don’t realize is that parcel along Ridge Avenue is a big part of the East Falls Riverfront Master Plan. The corridor has been at the center of the EFDC’s high hopes since 1998, when the organization released its vision to revitalize the area, EFDC executive director Gina Snyder told me. “It is the main focus of the plan.” If you’ve been down that area of Ridge lately, you know that it’s probably not quite where planners envision it, but it’s certainly got potential, and the lion’s share of the money EFDC has secured in redevelopment seems to be going to the Ridge Ave/Kelly Drive area. Snyder raised her concerns over the project to City Councilman Curtis Jones Jr. in this letter dated July 9. Jones has come out opposed to the school’s location.
DVHS building in the Philadelphia suburb Warminster, PA
David Schulick, owner of DVHS, declined to comment. But an article in the Roxborough Review last week reported DVHS remains undeterred and will go ahead with the development of the new DVHS location as planned. Right now, the only process of recourse left is to lobby the School Reform Commission to disallow the school at the proposed location, which a spokesman for Councilman Curtis Jones, Jr., said the councilman plans to do.
I’m not sure why Schulick chose the site on 4300 Ridge Ave. for the school, but the spot seems truly inconvenient for developers if the area hopes to turn it into the bustling corridor the EFDC has planned - and given the location’s position next to one of the city’s most gorgeous waterfront views, it’s not such a pipe dream. There’s also something slightly disingenuous about how Schulick has addressed community concerns: The lease for the property was signed in October 2008 without anyone else’s knowledge and months before he scheduled any sort of meeting to meet with community members. And even after the community voiced its overwhelming disapproval, the project didn’t seem to slow down. (Snyder said that she sent a list of alternative sites to Councilman Jones, who in turn sent them to a representative of DVHS. DVHS sent back emails to both, saying “Although we appreciate Gina’s efforts on your behalf, we have no need to explore alternative sites at this time,” Snyder said.)
The school would be built in the East Falls section of Philadelphia
That’s not to diminish the importance of schools like DVHS - the only reason the school is moving from its current Bustleton Avenue site in the Northeast is because the 200-student capacity isn’t enough to deal with growing need (DVHS’s other location is in Bucks County). The city has increasingly looked to alternative schools to help deal with the most disruptive students, and rightly so - keeping students in need of alternative education with the less unruly is bad for everyone.
At the same time, a 400-student school full of at-risk kids isn’t an easy sell for any neighborhood, and if the full consent of the community is the litmus for securing a location, you can be sure that the school will never get built.
What do you think: Should the school find another location? Could the school’s operator have handled things better? Is there ever a great place to put a school of at-risk teens in?
Andrew Thompson is a freelance writer in Philadelphia. He is a frequent contributor to Philadelphia City Paper and writes the urban economics column Metronomics for Next American City.
August 3rd, 2009 at 7:13 pm
it seems like common sense that the locations for these types of schools need to be selected with a lot of care and consideration for the surrounding neighborhood. I suspect that in this case the city did not look to closesly at the site. That is a shame because it will probably disrupt not only future development but the quality of life for the neighbors as well.
August 3rd, 2009 at 7:49 pm
Its interesting that David Shulick chose not to comment for this article. Probably because the focus was not on his school, but rather the real issue at hand—the sincere question, “Is this a good place for a school”?
In other articles written on the subject, he made it a point to sound off and make pointed comments about why the neighborhood might be opposing him, or that he has the right to put it there due to zoning code. However, with the fairmindedness of this article from WHYY, it is clear that Mr. Shulick isnt intersted in a civil, intellectual debate–instead he is only interested in getting his way, as is clear in the “Review” article and others published on the subject.
Thank you WHYY for printing something worthy of a discussion, rather than a one-sided piece hinting at other less substantiated subjects, as was published in both of the major papers over the past few weeks just to capture people’s attention.
August 3rd, 2009 at 10:31 pm
As an educator at an alternative school in Chestnut Hill I’ve been following this story with interest. It’s unfortunate, in my opinion, that all alternative schools are painted with the same brush. Though all private schools need to make money in order to survive, schools like this DVHS seem to exist more as profit-centers to enrich their sponsors. Their existence serves to discredit and devalue the mission of “true” alternative schools that strive to truly educate those who struggle in traditional learning environments.
Furthermore, I agree with the first poster that it’s the incumant duty of the school supervisor, (in this case, Arlene Ackerman), to ensure that these types of schools are placed in a suitable locations. By all accounts it appears that Mrs. Ackerman has dropped the ball in regards to DVHS.
August 4th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Great article Andrew.
It’s unfortunate that we live in a society, for one, that produces so many troubled teens, and two, that’s so quick to leave them destitute. The school should be built somewhere, obviously, perhaps in a community with a stronger economic foundation, such that the businesses won’t suffer (purportedly they’d suffer. I know expert on the subject). Still, as you surmised, no matter how booming the economy of an area, nobody is going to want, what is all too easily perceived as, a charity project to be built in their neighborhood. Nimbyism isn’t so much the issue in this case, true. But stronger communities and economies elsewhere, it’s more than not the case.
August 4th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
Whoops! meant to say, “I’m no expert on the subject,” in the parenthetical phrase above.
August 5th, 2009 at 12:11 am
Thank you for this article. As a person with 4 generations that lived in East Falls we all together remember the mess it was in the late 60’s to the 80’s with crime. You can ask any old timer of the area. We worked hard to clean up the mess. It took many grass root organizations to control the crime in our area. Back in the late 60’s and early 70’s, at risk boys were sent to what was called the Boone School. However, I cannot see such a school in the small committee of East Falls. It does not fit in with what we have now.
Traffic patterns have not been looked at. Ridge avenue is full of traffic at all times of the day. As it stands now if a fire alarm goes off, we as drivers have to allow for the fire and ambulances to get in and out of the 2 lane road. Full of buses this can be a bad situation. Traffic is one major concern. Walking safely is another.
We never had a high school like this in this area. Most, if not all of the residents here are and in the past were attending schools in Roxbrough (a larger area with better traffic flow) or in Private High schools.It does take a village to raise a child. But, these teenagers are not from this village. So I cannot see a benefit to this being in the East Falls area. During the busing days of the 60’s and 70’s we saw a lot of changes in the neighborhood and area businesses. Some good. Some not so good. Sadly, I feel It would not be a good change for this little hamlet.
I realize this is a business for David Schulick. I applaud is reasoning and fortitude. But is does not belong in East Falls.
The fact that the Buselton School is closing was not made public till now. You can bet I will be doing more research on this before the next community meeting. Thank you again.
August 11th, 2009 at 4:19 pm
I still don’t understand how this isn’t NIMBYism. The Youth Study Center is just up the street from where DVHS is planned and I don’t recall this level of pushback from the community. Why aren’t people even making that connection? One thing I could understand is that we already have one alternative facility in our area, and we don’t need another, but I haven’t heard that argument.
That area might be choice real estate, but it’s mighty empty right now, and there’s plenty of other empty space that will be available with the school. I don’t see how having a school there prevents any future development.
Also, the neighbors group is doing themselves a real disservice in how they are approaching people. While waiting for the train in East Falls I was approached about signing a petition and I said I didn’t want to discuss the issue. Which was met with a curt reply that there would be no discussion, just if I was “for or against it.” The petition gatherer then proceeded to try to get other signatures by just saying they want to build an alternative school down the road, isn’t that terrible? Yeah, way to be ineffective.
It is an issue that deserves discussion, but immediately painting it as for or against, villagers and outsiders is not fostering that discussion.
Sure, Ridge is busy, but maybe the business from staff from a big facility would be the extra boost that local businesses need to come into this corridor (or stay open once they’re here). It’s also directly on the bus lines so the students would not be venturing far from the school anyhow. Maybe the PR could have been handled better, but the basic plan for a school seems workable.