Close
Skip to Content
HDSB Logo
Main menu icon
I'd Like to...
  • Access eLearning courses
  • Apply for a Job
  • Find Adult and Continuing Education
  • Find My Local School
  • Find Student Busing
  • Get Homework Help
  • Pay Online
  • Register My Child for School
  • Rent School Space
  • Report A Student Absence
  • Request a Transcript
  • Resolve an Issue/Concern
  • Transfer within the Halton District
  • Volunteer
Alerts
  • Parents
    • Absence Reporting - SchoolMessenger
    • Calendar
    • Get Involved
    • Health and Well-Being
    • New to Halton
    • Register My Child for School
    • Special Education Programs and Placements
    • Welcome to a New School Year
    • Before and After School Care
    • COVID-19
    • Halton Community Resources
    • Human Rights & Equity
    • Pay Online
    • Report Cards
    • Technology & You
    • Why Choose HDSB?
    • Bus Cancellation and School Closure – Inclement Weather
    • Find My Local School
    • HDSB Mobile App
    • Kindergarten
    • Privacy and Freedom of Information (FOI)
    • Safe Schools
    • Transportation
  • Students
    • Adult, Alternative and Continuing Education
    • COVID-19
    • Graduation Requirements
    • High School Info Night
    • International Students
    • Safe Schools
    • Student Senate
    • Welcome Centre for Newcomer Students
    • Calendar
    • Environmental Leadership
    • Halton Cloud
    • Homework Help, Guidelines and Tools
    • Library Services
    • Secondary School
    • Transcript Requests
    • Community Involvement Hours
    • Expelled or Suspended Students (H.O.P.E.S.)
    • Health and Well-Being
    • Indigenous Rights & Education
    • Online Resources
    • Student Excellence Awards
    • Virtual Learning
  • Schools
    • Adult, Alternative and Continuing Education
    • Distribution of Materials to Schools
    • Information Technology in Schools
    • Program Accommodation Studies
    • Rent School Space
    • School Construction Projects
    • School Hours
    • Transfer Schools within the HDSB
    • Who to Contact
    • COVID-19
    • Find My Local School
    • Our Schools
    • Register My Child for School
    • School Boundary Reviews
    • School Enrolments
    • Secondary School
    • Transportation
    Image School Listing
    School Listing
  • Learning and Resources
    • Adult, Alternative and Continuing Education
    • Curriculum
    • English Language Learners-ELL
    • French
    • International and Indigenous Languages Elementary
    • Library Services
    • Secondary Education and Pathways
    • Virtual Learning
    • Arts Programs
    • De-Streaming
    • EQAO
    • Health and Physical Education
    • Kindergarten
    • Literacy & Math Resources
    • Special Education Programs and Placements
    • Before and After School Care
    • Elementary Education Programs
    • First Nation, Métis and Inuit Students
    • Innovation in Education at the HDSB
    • Learning & Tutoring Opportunities
    • Prior Learning Assessment
    • Summer School
  • Our Board
    • 2020-2024 Multi-Year Plan
    • Board of Trustees
    • Contact Us
    • Get Involved
    • HDSB Employee Groups
    • How to Resolve Issues and Concerns
    • Labour Updates
    • Policies and Administrative Procedures
    • Accessibility
    • Budget and Financial Information
    • Departments
    • Halton Learning Foundation
    • HDSB Student & Staff Census
    • Human Rights & Equity
    • Livestream
    • Publications
    • Administration and Superintendents
    • Careers at the HDSB
    • Director's Cut - Videos
    • Have Your Say Survey
    • HDSBcares
    • Indigenous Rights & Education
    • News
    • Reimagine Forward

Frequently Asked Questions

subnav icon More
Home/Schools/Program Accommodation Studies/Burlington Secondary School Program Accommodation Review (PAR)/Frequently Asked Questions/
Decrease Text Size Default Text Size Increase Text Size
Print Link
Share Link

More in this Section...

  • Program Accommodation Studies
    • Burlington Secondary School Program Accommodation Review (PAR)
      • Board Reports
      • Communications
      • Community Involvement
      • Frequently Asked Questions
      • Frequently Asked Questions
      • How to Read Options
      • Live Online Question and Answer Session with Stuart Miller
      • News and Updates
      • Options
      • Process Timelines
      • Program and Accommodation Review Committee
      • Public Meetings
      • Reasons for PAR
      • School Information Profiles
    • Burlington Secondary School Program and Accommodation Review (PAR) Implementation
      • Burlington PAR Implementation Update #8 - May 2019
      • Dr. Frank J. Hayden S.S.
      • Implementation Update - November 14, 2017
      • Implementation Update - September 21, 2017
      • I-STEM
      • Lester B. Pearson H.S./M.M. Robinson H.S.
      • PAR Implementation Update #3 (January, 2018)
      • PAR Implementation Update #4 (March 2018)
      • PAR Implementation Update #5 (June 2018)
      • PAR Implementation Update #6 - November 2018
      • PAR Implementation Update #7 - March 2019
      • Robert Bateman H.S./Burlington Central H.S.
      • Robert Bateman H.S./Nelson H.S.
    • English and FSL Programming 2015-16 (PVC)
    • NE Oakville PARC (PE16B) and Ward 4 Community Consultation
    • SE Oakville PAR (PE14) and Ward 3 Community Consultation
  • Adult, Alternative and Continuing Education
  • COVID-19
  • Distribution of Materials to Schools
  • Find My Local School
  • Information Technology in Schools
  • Lest we forget
  • Our Schools
  • Register My Child for School
  • Rent School Space
  • School Boundary Reviews
  • School Construction Projects
  • School Enrolments
  • School Hours
  • Secondary School
  • Transfer Schools within the HDSB
  • Transportation
  • Who to Contact

Quick Links

  • Find My Local School
  • Information Technology in Schools
  • Register My Child for School
  • School Listing
  • Transportation

Page Image

Page Content

​​​​​​​​​Live Online Question & Answer Session

On Monday, November 21, the Halton District School Board held a live online Question & Answer session (View the video)​ with Stuart Miller, Director of Education, and Domenico Renzella, General Manager of Planning. Parents, students and community members emailed questions about the Burlington PAR between 7-8:30 p.m. More than 240 questions were received during the evening and we endeavoured to answer as many of them as possible. Responses to other questions have been included as part of Frequently Asked Questions below.

Program and Accommodation Review Process

Why is there a need for a Program and Accommodation Review (PAR) in Burlington?

On October 19, 2016, the Board of Trustees approved the Director’s Preliminary Report on the undertaking of a Program and Accommodation Review for Burlington Secondary Schools, which initiated the Program and Accommodation Review (PAR) process for all secondary schools in Burlington. A PAR can be initiated as schools or groups of schools meet the following conditions, as stated in the Board PAR policy:

  • Staff has advised that a re-organization at secondary schools in Burlington could enhance program delivery and learning opportunities by offering a greater range in choices to secondary students.
  • Utilization rates at Robert Bateman HS and M.M. Robinson HS are currently under 65% and Lester B. Pearson HS is approaching 65%. According to Board Policy, if a school or a group of schools currently experience or will experience declining enrolments where the On The Ground (OTG) capacity is under 65% a PAR can be initiated.

More information can be found on the Reasons for Program and Accommodation Review webpage.

The Ministry of Education also provides a Guide to Parents regarding Pupil Accommodation Reviews (HDSB refers to such reviews as “Program and Accommodation Reviews”).

How will the affected community know about a PAR taking place?

According to the Ministry of Education Guideline, parents/guardians, staff and school council members of the affected schools will need to be informed. The revised Ministry Guidelines are reflected in the updated Board PAR policy. The timeline for PAR is shown in Schedule “B" of the Board PAR policy.

Stakeholders will be notified of meetings though school-based communications, email messages, social media (Twitter), media releases through the Board website, and advertisements in the Burlington Post newspaper.

Why is a recommended option to close Burlington Central HS and Lester B. Pearson HS included in the Director’s Preliminary Report? Is this a final decision?

No. One recommended option is required by the Ministry of Education Pupil Accommodation Review Guideline as well as the Board ‘s PAR policy, which is to be presented to Board of Trustees as a part of the Director’s Preliminary Report. This option is a starting point for discussions and community input for the Program and Accommodation Review Committee. Ultimately, it is the Board of Trustees who will make the final decision.

How is HDSB ensuring that this PAR process reflects the Ministry Guidelines and includes sufficient community input?

On February 17, 2016, the Trustees approved a new Program and Accommodation Review policy that reflects the new Ministry Guidelines with respect to Pupil Accommodation Reviews.

Community involvement is an important part of the Board’s PAR process. This PAR process is based on the Board PAR policy and provides community input through the Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC), which is open to members of the public for observation, as well as public meetings and delegations to the Board. The Board has hired Ipsos Reid to facilitate public meetings.

In addition, the Board has engaged the community through a supplementary communication strategy. This includes information sessions, a live Q&A sessions and providing an opportunity for students to provide their feedback. For more information, please see the Supplementary Communication Strategy under Board Reports. 

How do I get involved in the PAR process?
  • Parents/guardians can get involved in the PAR by becoming a member of the Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC). One (1) parent/guardian per school is nominated by the School Council Chair. A second parent/guardian is selected, per school, to become a member of the PARC through an application and selection process. When the expression of interest forms are available, they will be posted on the Board’s website.
  • Learn more about the reason for this PAR by attending the Board's supplementary information sessions scheduled at each secondary school.
  • Participate in the live online Question and Answer session on November 21, 2016.
  • There will be two (2) public meetings held by the Board, which can be attended by any member of the public to learn about the process and share feedback.
  • Once the final report is published on the Board website, members of the public can delegate the Board during the scheduled Public Delegation Night.
  • Feedback and/or comments can be directed to members of the PARC as well as being sent to the Board’s PAR email address BurlSSPAR@hdsb.ca.

Please see Process Timelines for dates. Additional information is also provided in the Community Involvement webpage.

How will we know which schools will be closing and when?

The Process Timelines webpage provides a timeline of the PAR process, which meets the timeline stated in the Board policy. The Director’s Final Report, along with the recommendation(s), will be available on the website prior to the report proceeding to the Board of Trustees for approval. The tentative timeline for the Director’s Report to go to the Board of Trustees for decision is mid-May.

If the Board of Trustees approves any school closures at that time, the decisions will take effect at the end of June 2018. Please note: the timeline for final closures is tentative and will be finalized in the Director’s Final Report.

Has the Board examined other options before proceeding with this PAR?

There are two challenges the Board faces that needed to be addressed:

  • The need to ensure that students in all schools have the same opportunity to participate in and benefit from a broad range of programs and services;
  • Utilization rates that are currently under 65% or approaching 65% at Lester B. Pearson HS, M.M. Robinson HS and Robert Bateman HS.

To address these challenges, the Board typically looks at the following options:

  • Changing school boundaries and program offerings to balance enrolment and programming across schools in an area;
  • Finding community partners who would be willing to share space in open and operating facilities with underutilized space through joint use or lease agreements; and/or
  • Decommissioning or demolishing a portion of a facility that is not required for student use to reduce facility operating costs.

Boundary changes would not necessarily result in substantially increasing enrolments overall, as there would still be deficit in pupil places even with the redirection of students. Currently, only one of the seven secondary schools in Burlington is over capacity, i.e. Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS. Redirecting students would not address excess pupil places south of the QEW/Highway 403 or challenges to program delivery.

On June 22, 2016, the Board presented its community partners with details regarding schools throughout the Board with excess capacity that would be suitable for community partnerships. All Board facilities that share or house facilities with a secondary school in Burlington are available for community partnerships, with the exception of Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS. At the time of the PAR, no definitive expressions of interest have been submitted for facilities affected by this PAR. For more information, please see Community Planning and Partnerships.

Decommission or demolishing a portion of a school facility will not address the programming challenges faced by Burlington secondary students.

Could the challenge of low utilization at secondary schools in Burlington be solved through boundary reviews?

As of October 31, 2016, M.M. Robinson HS, Lester B. Pearson HS and Robert Bateman HS have utilization at or below 65%. Changing boundaries will only redistribute students to other schools. It also does not address the issue of low utilization south of the QEW, where there are currently 1267 empty pupil places.

The purpose of this PAR is to address challenges with low utilization and enhance programming opportunities, both of which cannot fully be addressed through a boundary change alone.

Why does the Director’s Preliminary Report not make reference to any consideration of the Official Plan Review for the City of Burlington?

The enrolment projections are based on the Board's current projection methodology as outlined in our Long Term Accommodation Plan, and includes residential developments that have been circulated by the City of Burlington to the Board’s Planning Department.

Following the approval of the City of Burlington’s Strategic Plan in April 2016, the municipality is currently in the process of preparing a new Official Plan. The new Official Plan is not expected to go to council as a draft until March of 2017. Final approval of the Official Plan will take several months. In our opinion and experience, potential objections from the public and referrals to the Ontario Municipal Board will result in further delay of its approval. As a result, the timing and type of development in terms of intensification is unknown and thus difficult for the Board to include as part of its long term enrolment projections.

Should the Board wait until the results of the Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB) PAR to proceed with this PAR?

The PAR proposed by the Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB) is still in the very early stages and at this time, a report to undertake a PAR has not been presented to their Board of Trustees. HDSB has identified the need for a PAR involving all Burlington secondary schools since the 2012-2013 Long Term Accommodation Plan.

Why has the Board not included the grade 7 and 8 students in the Preliminary Director’s Report and the PAR process?

The Director’s Preliminary Report makes it clear that the elementary panel of Burlington Central may be the subject of a separate PAR if the Board decides to close the secondary school panel.

Two of the secondary school sites involved in this PAR, Aldershot and Burlington Central also house elementary programs that occupy a different part of the building, and are funded separately and reported separately to the Ministry. The elementary and secondary programs accommodated at the each site are effectively distinct schools operating under one roof.

The PAR will be charged with evaluating the accommodation options for all of the secondary schools located in the City of Burlington. If the Board was to include in this PAR the elementary program accommodated at Burlington Central, it would also be necessary to include in the PAR all the elementary schools in Burlington which feed into the secondary schools. Such an undertaking would be complex to the point of being unworkable and unmanageable.

Why is Gary Allan High School not included in the Program and Accommodation Review for Burlington Secondary Schools?

Gary Allan H.S. is an adult, alternative and community education school located on New Street. The school houses programs that are not included in a typical high school setting or do not require normal secondary school classroom instruction. Due to the uniqueness of the school, the Board has not included it as part of the Long Term Accommodation Plan, given that the transitional and mobility nature of the students it is difficult to undertake enrolment projections.

Would the School Information Profiles (SIPs) be updated with data for the 2016-2017 school year?

The Board has updated the data in the SIPs with data based on October 31, 2016, where available.

Certain items contained with the SIPs cannot be updated with 2016-2017 school year data as the Board will not have a one full school year’s data until Fall of 2017. Examples are school utility costs, community uses and revenue, which are based on the most recent data available for one full school year, i.e. September 1, 2015-August 31, 2016.

How do I request clarification of items in the School Information Profiles? 

Please email questions or comments regarding the School Information Profiles to burlsspar@hdsb.ca.

Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC)

What is the purpose of a Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC)?

Public consultation is a vital part of the PAR process. The Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC) is established to assume an advisory role with respect to the PAR, and act as the official conduit of information between the Board of Trustees and the local school communities.

The PARC will provide feedback to the Board of Trustees and the community on the options considered in the Director’s Preliminary Report. The PARC can provide alternate accommodation options than those presented in the Director’s Preliminary Report, with supporting rationale.

Will video recordings of the PARC meetings be posted online?

The PARC meetings will not be video recorded, however, any members of the public can attend the PARC working meetings for observation. In addition, notes from the meeting will be posted on the Board website following the meetings.

Will geography be considered when options are reviewed by the PARC? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

When PARC members review options, proximity to other schools (non-bus distances, natural boundaries, walking routes) will be considered, as it forms part of the PARC Framework.

Other factors include:

  • Range of mandatory programs;
  • Range of optional programs;
  • Viability of Program – number of students required to offer and maintain program in an educationally sound and fiscally responsible way;
  • Physical and environmental state of existing schools;
  • Accommodation of students in permanent school facilities and minimal use of portable classrooms;
  • Balance of overall enrolment in each school in the area to maximize student access to programs, resources, and extra-curricular opportunities and avoid over and underutilization of buildings;
  • Expansion and placement of new ministry or board programs;
  • Stable, long-term boundaries to avoid frequent boundary changes;
  • Cost effectiveness of transportation;
  • Fiscal responsibilities;
  • Existing and potential community uses and facility partnerships;
  • Goals and focus of the current multi-year plan.

PARC members will review options through the lens of the PARC framework to ensure all criteria is considered.

If I’m not a member of the PARC, how do I share my feedback?

If you are not a member of the PARC, input can be shared directly with your local school's parent/guardian representatives by email. For email addresses of PARC representatives, see Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC). In addition, parents/guardians can share feedback at the two public meetings.

Questions and/or comments can also be submitted to the Board’s PAR email address burlsspar@hdsb.ca.

Additional methods of sharing input are provided in the Community Involvement webpage.

Options

​Where do I find full details of each option?

Please see the Director’s Preliminary Report for details regarding options 1-18.

Revised Option 19 and all new options are available under Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC) meeting materials.

Why was Option 19 chosen as the Staff Recommended Option?

Option 19 was selected because it was the best option Board staff arrived at to address those challenges currently facing the Board.

A school with utilization of 65% is not automatically considered for closure. It was determined that there is a need to include all the secondary schools in the Burlington PAR in order to address the low and declining enrolments and develop solutions. Staff reviewed various factors, including but not limited to program offerings, specialty rooms, facility condition, proximity to other schools and transportation.

Option 19 is staff recommended in order to address:

  • Low enrolments at Lester B. Pearson HS and low-utilization at M.M. Robinson HS by closing Lester B. Pearson HS;
  • Low enrolments at Aldershot HS, under-utilization at Burlington Central HS by closing Burlington Central HS and redistributing students to Nelson HS and Aldershot HS;
  • High enrolments at Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS by redistribution of students to Robert Bateman HS and the removal of the FI program and redirecting FI students to M.M. Robinson HS;
  • Low enrolments and low-utilization at Robert Bateman HS by adding a FI program and by redistribution of students from Nelson HS and Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS.

Please refer to the Director’s Preliminary Report for more information.

How are you addressing long term enrolment growth at Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS?

As a part of Option 19, all French Immersion students at Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS will be redirected to M.M. Robinson HS and Robert Bateman HS. For more information regarding the proposed boundaries under the Staff Recommended Option, please see Option 19.

Option 19 will continue to be reviewed by the PARC.

In Option 19, why are all French Immersion students relocated from Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS?

Option 19 is a staff recommendation and not the final decision of the Board.

The redirection of the FI program from Dr. Frank Hayden SS to MM Robinson SS, was based on the fact that the latter does have an existing FI program and moreover it was a way to provide accommodation relief to Dr. Frank Hayden SS.

As well, in order to provide accommodation relief to Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS, the staff recommended option includes the redirection of English and French Immersion students that reside south of Upper Middle Road and East of Appleby Line to Robert Bateman HS. At this time, it is staff's position that this would be preferable over undertaking of major boundary changes that would result in the redirection of English and FI students to MM Robinson SS.

Under Option 19, utilization at Aldershot HS will be approximately 150% from 2018. How will students be accommodated? (Rev: Feb 14, 2017)

The Aldershot facility can accommodate portables if enrolment surpasses OTG capacity.

Board projections in the 2015-2016 Long Term Accommodation Plan indicate that Aldershot Elementary will have a utilization rate between 46% - 52% over the next 5 years. Due to the very low utilization rate at Aldershot Elementary, the Board is confident that portables will not be required at the elementary school in the near future and that those could be utilized by the secondary school. As such, portable capacity previously assigned to the elementary school was re-assigned to the secondary school. For detailed projections for Aldershot Elementary and capacity information, please see the 2015-2016 Long Term Accommodation Plan.

In addition, the Aldershot site is a large site. This provides space for additions to the existing school building if additional permanent pupil places are required.

In Option 19, why is the Board proposing to leave such a large portion of the city with no school but keep Nelson HS and Robert Bateman HS open? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

Option 19 is staff recommended in order to address:

  • Low enrolments at Lester B. Pearson HS and low-utilization at M.M. Robinson HS by closing Lester B. Pearson HS;
  • Low enrolments at Aldershot HS, under-utilization at Burlington Central HS by closing Burlington Central HS and redistributing students to Nelson HS and Aldershot HS;
  • High enrolments at Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS by redistribution of students to Robert Bateman HS and the removal of the FI program and redirecting FI students to M.M. Robinson HS;
  • Low enrolments and low-utilization at Robert Bateman HS by adding a FI program and by redistribution of students from Nelson HS and Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS.

As a part of the PARC process, additional options may be brought forward for review.

In Option 19 (and 19b), why does a portion of Headon Forest attend Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS? (New: Mar. 10, 2017)

One of the purposes of the original Option 19 was to keep Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS English boundary intact and redirect FI students to M.M. Robinson HS. It was modified to create Option 19b based on comments from the Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC).

Under Option 19b, grade 8 English students from C.H. Norton PS will feed into M.M. Robinson HS as a unified cohort (currently, it's split between Lester B. Pearson HS and M.M. Robinson HS). The North Headon Forest area currently attends Florence Meares PS for English and feeds into Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS, which will continue under Option 19b.

In Option 4, why aren’t boundary changes considered for schools north of the QEW/Highway 403?

It was the intent of Options 1-8 to show the impact of closing one high school and demonstrate the different issues between north and south of the QEW. Options 1-4 focuses on schools south of the QEW with possible / minor changes or no changes to schools north of the QEW. Options 5-8 focuses on schools north of the QEW with possible / minor changes to school south of the QEW. Options 9-12 focuses on Burlington HS as a whole.

The rationale for Option 4 is to identify the impacts of only Robert Bateman HS closing with minimal boundary changes to the remaining schools.

If the PARC requests an additional option, then it can be considered by the Board.

In Option 4, why wasn’t the IB program moved to Lester B. Pearson HS?

If the IB program is transferrable, then it can be moved to any school. In Option 4, the IB program was transferred to Nelson HS due to its proximity to Robert Bateman HS.

As an option, can some students from Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS be redirected to Lester B. Pearson HS? Could students from Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS be held at Lester B. Pearson HS?

Students from Dr. Frank J. Hayden could be directed to Lester B. Pearson HS, however this would not address underutilization at M.M. Robinson HS, or underutilization south of the QEW/Highway 403.

The PARC will be reviewing a variety of potential solutions to the underutilization issue in Burlington.

If English program students from the Kilbride PS catchment return to Lester B. Pearson HS, would that balance enrolment north of the QEW? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

As of Oct 31, 2016, there are 111 English program students that reside in the Kilbride PS catchment that attend Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS. If the 111 students were added to Lester B. Pearson HS, Lester B. Pearson HS enrolments would increase to 503 students and have 138 available pupil places. However, redirecting English students from Kilbride PS catchment to Lester B. Pearson HS would not alone solve the balance of enrolment issues at schools north of the QEW as Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS will remain overutilized, while both M.M. Robinson HS and Lester B. Pearson HS will remain underutilized. The total number of empty pupil places north of the QEW/Highway 403, would remain at 542 pupil places.

Why was there no option where both Nelson HS and Lester B. Pearson HS closes?

If the PARC requests an option, then it can be considered by the Board.

Can other options and feedback be brought forth?

Yes. Members of the public can provide information to your school’s parent/guardian representatives on the PARC, as well as to the Board’s PAR email address at burlsspar@hdsb.ca.

Education Funding and Cost Savings

How is education funded in Ontario?

A bulk of the operating funds for school boards are provided by the Ministry of Education through the Grants for Student Needs (GSN). This includes, but is not limited to, funding for classroom resources, student achievement, special education programs and services, facility operation and staffing. For more information, please see the Ministry of Education’s 2016-17 Education Funding: A Guide to the Grants for Student Needs.

The Board's budget and financial information are also publicly available through our website.

What is the estimated cost saving from implementing Option 19? (New: Feb. 21, 2017)

Please see Estimated Operating Savings Analysis under Option 19 for more information.

Consultation and Community Involvement

Will opportunity to delegate be open to any member of the public or only open to those schools that have been newly advised of their closure?

Any member of the public can to delegate to the Board. For more information, see Delegate the Board.

Why is the public delegation night in May, after the Director’s Final Report? (Revised: Mar. 28, 2017)

Prior to the Director’s Final Report, opportunities for the public to provide feedback may occur through the PARC and public meetings. Feedback received during these sessions, as well as information received through municipalities and other community partners will form part of the Director’s Final Report. Key considerations in formulating the final recommendation will also be identified in this report.

The purpose of the public delegation night is to provide members of the public an opportunity to provide feedback on the Director’s Final Report, before the final decision by Trustees.

Why aren’t parents of elementary students consulted?

All members of the public, including parents of elementary students, are provided the opportunity to participate in the PAR process and share their input. Please see Community Involvement for ways to get involved.

When will the student survey be released?

The survey was released to students on November 28, 2016 and included questions regarding program, extracurricular and learning environment. Students will also be able to provide input via open text responses.

Will the results of the student survey be released to the public?

The results of the student survey, including the questions and the response rates for each school has been shared with the PARC. Given that this is part of the community consultation, the results are posted under meeting materials on the PARC webpage.

Why does the PARC not hear the opinions of teachers and principals?

All staff in Burlington high schools will have the opportunity to provide input via a staff survey. Staff are also able to share input through the opportunities provided at Community Involvement.

School Programming

 Will the Board provide a list of courses taught at each school?

Yes. A list of all courses taught at each school is available through the School Information Profiles (SIPs).

Are small schools better able to support students in need of extra help?

Generally, staff at small schools tend to know each student better and may be able to proactively intervene to support a student who is in need of assistance due to the higher ratio of service staff to students. The Board provides this to maintain the core functions of the school.

This does not mean that large schools are not able to proactively respond to student learning needs. Larger schools have a lower percentage of early leavers, who are students that leave a school prior to graduation, when compared to smaller schools. Larger schools do provide the same services as smaller schools. Larger schools offer more programming choices to all students. For information, please see Reasons for Program and Accommodation Review.

The Halton District School Board strives towards its vision that every student will explore and enhance their potential, passions, and strengths to thrive as a contributing global citizens.

Similar to ‘small schools’, can 'large schools’ also face the challenge where some courses may end up with too few students enrolled to actually offer the program?

This does occur in all schools. Student choice determines what courses run, so in any particular year, certain courses may not run if students don’t choose them. Following the course selection process by students at each school, some courses may not have sufficient student numbers to be taught. This occurs in small and large schools.

However, larger schools will have sufficient student numbers for the Board to provide more courses than smaller schools. In addition, larger schools enable the school to provide more than one class of a course. By having more classes available in a course, it is more likely that schedules can be built to accommodate students, which is not always the case in schools offering single classes of courses. Students in larger schools therefore have more opportunity to take the courses they would like without having to attend another school, take the course online, or take that course the following school year or via summer/night school. Larger schools provide more options for students who would like to take those optional courses.

Is more funding available for programming at larger schools than smaller schools?

Funding is provided to the school board on a per pupil basis. The allocation of this funding to schools is a Board decision and is generally proportional to the number of students in a school. Hence, larger schools with a greater number of students, typically receive more funding. There are however several areas in smaller schools that the Board provides additional funding/support to ensure that the same essential services are available as those in larger schools.

Why aren’t more courses and programs provided at small schools?

To offer a course or program, there must be a sufficient number of students interested. In smaller schools, the same variety of courses and programs may not be run as they do not have the critical mass of students to run as many courses. Small schools will often provide alternate methods for students to take courses, where feasible. This might include e-learning or offering a specific course in alternate years (e.g., Grade 12 Workplace mathematics). Guidance departments work with students to plan course selection over the course of their high school career.

Why can’t the Board offer the same quality of education across all schools in Burlington, regardless of size?

The Board provides high quality programming in all of its school including a range of mandatory courses across all secondary schools in Halton. However, the Board cannot provide a full range of optional courses at all schools due to the lack of interest for certain optional courses at some schools. Generally, larger schools are able to offer a wider range of optional programs due to sufficient enrolments per optional course.

Why does LBP only have 1.5 feeder schools currently? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

Prior to the opening of Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS, Kilbride PS (Eng), Sir E. MacMillan (Eng, ExtF) and CH Norton (Eng) fed into Lester B. Pearson HS. Following the school boundary review process, which involved public consultation, the approved boundaries resulted in the redirection of Kilbride (Eng) students to the new secondary school. At the time of the boundary review, projections for 2016 indicated that the enrolments would decrease from 625 (98% OTG utilization) to 562 (88% utilization) following the redirection of Kilbride students. However, actual enrolments for 2016 is 392 (61% utilization) as a result:

  • The percentage of students electing to attend another high school for grade 9 has increased, resulting in lower enrolments into grade 9;
  • A decline in Late French Immersion enrolment;
  • A low percentage of students attending Lester B. Pearson for a 5th year.
Why does the North Headon Forest area currently attend Florence Meares PS (K- Gr. 8) instead of C.H. Norton PS (K- Gr. 8) for English programming? (New: Mar. 10, 2017)

At this time, C.H. Norton PS cannot accommodate all of the elementary students from Headon Forest without approaching Total Capacity of the site. The C.H. Norton site can accommodate a maximum of 8 portables. Having the North Headon Forest area attend Florence Meares PS for English programming ensures portables would not be required at both C.H. Norton PS and Florence Meares PS.

How will the Board ensure that success continues for Lester B. Pearson HS students if they attend M.M. Robinson HS?

The Board’s vision is that “Every student will explore and enhance their potential, passions, and strengths to thrive as contributing global citizens.” Our Multi-Year Plan 2016-2020 outlines our collective commitment to the success of all students in all of our schools. When students change schools, appropriate transition planning occurs to support a successful transition to the new setting.

What is the number of students in the Orchard, Alexander’s community that opt to attend Corpus Christi CSS? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

The Board does not collect data regarding students that opt to attend a non-HDSB secondary school from a grade 8 HDSB school. Please note that the students indicated below may have elected to attend any HCDSB secondary school or any other school outside of HDSB.

John William Boich PS: For the 2016-2017 school year, 17% of the grade 8 graduating English class (10 students) from John William Boich PS attended a school outside of HDSB. All students in the grade 8 graduating class attended a HDSB secondary school.

Orchard Park PS: For the 2016-2017 school year, 12% of the grade 8 graduating English class (3 students) from Orchard Park PS attended a school outside of HDSB. All students in the grade 8 graduating class attended a HDSB secondary school.

Alexander’s PS: For the 2016-2017 school year, 37% of the grade 8 graduating English class (22 students) from Alexander’s PS attended a school outside of HDSB. 3% of the grade 8 graduating FI class (1 students) from the school attended a school outside of HDSB.

Does the number of students returning for a 5th year at Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS contribute to overcapacity at the school? (New: Mar. 3, 2017)

The number of students that return for a fifth year cannot be considered a major factor that contributes to over capacity at Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS.

Generally, how many students return to school for a 5th year? (New: Mar. 3, 2017)

Students may chose to return for a fifth year for various reasons, such as, to meet credit requirements for graduation, to take courses previously unavailable or unable to fit in a student's timetable, a change of chosen pathway requiring additional/other courses, etc. From 2013-2016, an estimated 15-27% of the Grade 12 students returned for a 5th year for various reasons. Please note that students can attend the same school or a different school for a 5th year.

To save costs, could the Board charge a tuition fee for students returning for a 5th year?

As a public school board, the board can not charge a tuition for our core educational program.

What would happen to special programming and activities at schools if they are closed?

After a school closure is announced, the next phase would be to develop a detailed transition plan (School Integration Plan). Any school closures would require the Board to examine the redirection of programs, resources and other activities to other schools. Typically these schools would be the schools receiving additional students from the closed school.

How will the Board meet the needs of students with exceptionalities in the event of a major transition?

Whenever students with special education needs change schools there is significant transition planning involved by staff who know these students best. The needs of students with exceptionalities will be discussed by the Board as part of the School Integration Process following the PAR and transition planning will occur between the schools involved as part of this process.

Are the social and psychological consequences of splitting students from their peers being considered?

Currently, numerous schools in Halton have split cohorts from grades 5 or 6 to higher grades, and grade 8 to grade 9. Examples from Burlington include grade 8 students from Tecumseh PS attending Burlington Central HS and Nelson HS and students at Frontenac PS to Nelson HS and Robert Bateman HS. Where students change schools, planning occurs to support a successful transition.

Would you consider creating regional programs to increase enrolments?

It is not felt that regional programs (or magnet programs or speciality programs) would attract enough students from outside the Board to have a significant impact on the number of empty pupil spaces in Burlington.

Can students chose which school to attend in grade 9?

The Board establishes secondary school boundaries for English and French Immersion students. If a student wishes to attend a different school, students must apply through the Out of Area Transfer Request​ Other regional programs, such as International Baccalaureate (IB), Essential program or special education placements are accessed through program specific processes.

How many students are accepted into Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS through Out of Area Transfer Request?

When Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS opened in 2013, some students were accepted through the Out of Area Transfer Request process. At the time, the school did not offer all four secondary grades and had sufficient space to accommodate the additional students.

The school is now closed for Out of Area Transfer Request​ due to enrolment pressures. However, during the 2016-2017 school year, Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS did accept 2 out of catchment students from Kilbride PS in order to keep the small rural cohort together. Similarly, for the 2017-2018 school year, 2 students from Kilbride PS have been accepted on Out of Area Transfer Request​, again to keep the small class cohort together.

Why are students permitted to attend a school through Out of Area Transfer Request?

The Halton District School Board encourages students to attend the school designated for families in their area.

The Board, however, provides to students who are residents in the Halton region the opportunity to apply for enrolment in a Halton school outside their regular school attendance area where there are sufficient pupil places to accommodate them. The key factor in the consideration of these applications is to ensure that there is no significant negative impact on the enrolments or internal resources of either the home or the requested school or their capacity to provide viable programs (e.g. French Immersion). For more information, see Secondary Out of Area Transfer Request​​ Administrative Procedure.

Would students be able to attend a school outside of the school catchment?

Students interested in attending a school out of catchment must follow the regular Out of Area Transfer Request​ procedure.

Staffing

What would happen to teachers and other staff when schools are closed? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

If Trustees approve the closure of any schools, the Board would have discussions with the different unions impacted and determine the process that will be implemented to ensure alignment with collective agreements and to recognize the emotional impact on those employees impacted. It should be noted that different processes may exist for each employee group.

Furthermore, HDSB is a growing school board due to residential growth in Milton and Oakville, and we do not anticipate requiring fewer permanent staff over the long term.

Transportation

What is the eligibility criteria for the Board to provide bussing for students?

Secondary students who live farther than a 3.2 km walking distance from their school are eligible for transportation. For more information, please see the Board’s Transportation policy.

Is secondary school busing shared? (New: Mar. 1, 2017)

Secondary schools in Halton share bussing with elementary schools, as well the Halton Catholic District School Board.

Have bus driver shortages in Burlington been addressed? (New: Mar. 1, 2017)

Halton Student Transportation Services (HSTS) provides student transportation for the Halton District School Board and Halton Catholic District School Board.

Currently, there is a total of 119 school bus routes servicing Burlington schools (HDSB and HCDSB combined). At this time there are three (3) large bus routes and four (4) mini bus routes in Burlington that do not have a permanent driver. These routes are currently being serviced by supply drivers employed by the respective bus company. At this time each bus company has several drivers in training with an expected completion date being the beginning of March. Additionally, several drivers will be returning in early March from winter vacations.

In addition to the above, HSTS is reviewing various options to address the bus driver shortage over the next few months. It is anticipated that any implementation of these options would address the driver shortage prior to the commencement of the 2018/2019 school year, the year that any school closures may take effect, if approved by the Board.

School Facilities

What is On the Ground (OTG) capacity?

On the Ground capacity is the provincially-recognized pupil place capacity of the school building. This figure is recognized as the operating capacity of the school. This figure does not include portables or portapaks.

In determining the OTG of a school, each space within the school building is assigned a student loading. Secondary instructional space is loaded at 21 students each, and includes standard classrooms, computer labs, gyms and specialty rooms such as tech rooms. Special Education rooms, such as those used for Community Pathways program are loaded at 9 or 12 students each. Excluded are auditoriums, cafeterias, library and seminar space, which are loaded at 0.

Instructional space at elementary schools are loaded differently. Where Board facilities share space between an elementary and secondary school, OTG capacity of one school is separate and does not contribute to the OTG of the other school. For example, the OTG capacity for Aldershot Elementary is distinct from that of Aldershot HS.

Why has On the Ground (OTG) capacity changed over the years at some schools?

Over time rooms within school buildings are re-assessed based on room usage and/or renovations, which can result in changes to the OTG.

What is excess or shortage of pupil places?

To determine the number of excess or shortage pupil places, enrolment is subtracted from the On The Ground (OTG) capacity of a school building.

When enrolment is lower than OTG capacity, a school will have excess pupil places.

When enrolment is greater than OTG capacity, a school will have a shortage of pupil places. In these instances, portable classrooms would be required to house additional students.

Would portable classrooms be required at schools under each option? (New: Mar. 7, 2017)

It is difficult the exact number of portables at this time, as the number depends on the school layout, timetabling, number and availability of standard and specialty classrooms.

Please note that secondary schools can typically accommodate 10-15% more students within the permanent school building without the addition of portables due to the number of part-time students and through creative timetabling.

If either Aldershot HS or Burlington Central HS are closed, would grade 7-8 students in these shared facilities be housed in portables?

Accommodation of any elementary students housed in either the Aldershot or Burlington Central facility has not be determined at this time, and will not be determined through this PAR process.

The existing spaces for grade 7's and 8’s will remain within the designated OTG (On The Ground) portion of the elementary section of those facilities. As such, it is unlikely that those students would be placed in portables if the secondary portion of those facilities are closed. Ultimately, once a decision has been made by trustees, then the accommodation of elementary students may need to be reviewed by the Board. However, Board staff does not have any pre-determined plans for grades 7 and 8 students at this time.

​​​​What is being done to achieve equality between older schools in declining neighbourhoods and new construction where schools appear to have more amenities?

The Board has undertaken an initiative called “Close The Gap” to address needs of older schools. Please contact Facility Services if you have further questions regarding initiatives.

Which secondary school facilities in Burlington have air conditioning?

Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS is the only secondary school facility in Burlington that is fully air conditioned.

Lester B. Pearson HS and Robert Bateman HS are air conditioned with the exception of their technical/vocational rooms. 75% of M.M. Robinson HS is air conditioned with the exception of their technical/vocational rooms.

What is Facility Condition Index (FCI) and how are projected renewal needs determined? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

Facility Condition Index (FCI) is a standard benchmark that is used to compare the condition of a buildings. It compares a facility’s total five year renewal needs to the cost of rebuilding the same building. The assessment does not measure or assess the building against the current building code. FCI compares the building to itself, from when it was new to now. It does not compare one building vs. another. It does not identify need to bring the building up to current standards.

Schools assessed are assessed on a 5 year rotation. The facilities involved in this PAR have been assessed in 2011 or 2013, with the exception of Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS, which has not been assessed (See notes in item 1.6.5 - Projected facility renewal needs). The Ministry has just completed one assessment cycle and has begun a new five-year assessment cycle in 2016. Based on the timing of individual Ministry assessments, not all schools involved in the PAR will be assessed in the current school year and data for schools currently being assessed may not be available prior to the completion of the PAR. The assessments are a snapshot in time, as of the date of inspection.

The assessments are conducted by Ministry of Education independent, third-party facility inspectors. Each assessment team is comprised of two engineers — one with expertise in building design and construction, and the other with expertise in building systems (e.g., mechanical and electrical). A HDSB staff member accompanies the assessment team throughout a school assessment tour.

The assessments identify renewal events (repair or replacement) that should be completed in a five-year window, and includes:

  • site features,
  • building structure,
  • building envelope (exterior walls and roofs),
  • interior components or finishes,
  • mechanical,
  • fire and life safety, and
  • electrical systems.

The assessments do not include:

  • energy,
  • environmental or accessibility audits,
  • Portables,
  • solar photovoltaic panels and other solar energy collectors,
  • the appropriateness of room space,
  • small sheds,
  • play equipment/structures,
  • score boards,
  • goal posts,
  • flag poles, and
  • asbestos abatement is also out of scope.
Could you please confirm and clarify the names of the two companies that prepared the renewal costs as outlined at the February 16, 2017 PARC meeting? (New: Feb. 22, 2017)

The Halton District School Board Facility Services department uses an Excel spreadsheet to record work complete and requested in schools. This is the source of the historical work completed in schools as outlined in the SIPs.

The Ministry of Education's 'Condition Assessment Program' has been through a few changes since it was started. Initially the company that provided the software was ReCAPP ( that was before the reports that were included in the SIPs). The next software was TCPS (Total Capital Planning Solutions), provided to the Ministry of Education by Altus Group Ltd. The inspections were done by a number of engineering firms retained by the Ministry. This data was reflected in the first report posted in the SIP's on what schools need in the future.

Altus was purchased by VFA Canada Corporation and they have worked with the Ministry of Education and school boards to transition the data from TCPS to their own system VFA facility. They use their own engineering support to do the inspections of the buildings. This data is in the revised report posted in the SIP's on what schools need in the future.

If Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS is overcapacity, could it impact access for emergency services at the school and the community centre? (New: Feb. 2, 2017) 

Student health and safety is always a top priority for the Board. As with other schools in Halton, Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS has approved processes to handle emergency situations. During school emergency evacuation practice drills, the principal at Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS indicated that no major concerns were identified by the police and fire departments with their ability to enter/exit the school building/property.

Why did the Board build the new Dr. Frank Hayden Secondary School, given the potential impact on existing secondary schools in Burlington?​​​

As part of the planning for the new Alton and Orchard Communities in the mid 1990’s, the Board had always envisioned a secondary school to accommodate students generated from these new areas. Given the residential growth of those two communities and the number of new HDSB elementary schools that were built, enrolment projections indicated that there was a sufficient number of students that could justify a new school to service North-East Burlington. As a result, a business case was prepared and submitted to the Ministry of Education for funding a new secondary school, given the existing and projected need to accommodate secondary students from the area.

What is the cost to construct a new secondary school?

On October 28, 2016, the Ministry of Education approved funding for a new 1200-pupil place secondary school in Milton. Total funding provided by the Ministry is $32,555,603 for the construction of the new facility. This excludes site acquisition and site prep costs.

Is the Board reviewing the closing of schools in Burlington, in order to obtain Ministry of Education funding to build new schools in Milton and Oakville growth areas?

No. The Ministry of Education Capital Priorities Funding model, requires school Boards to submit business cases regarding the construction of new schools and additions. The business cases require the school boards to look at specific review areas/communities, such as Milton and North Oakville, in order to determine need. Under enrolled areas, such as Burlington, are not included in the analysis.

How many excess pupil places does the Board need to eliminate in order to have the opportunity to apply for funding to rebuild and upgrade older Burlington Secondary School facilities? (New: Mar. 7, 2017)

Under the Ministry’s 2016 School Consolidation Capital (SCC) funding program, eligible projects include those where two or more schools are consolidated into one new facility, additions and/or renovations to existing schools to accommodate enrolment from closed schools and right-sizing existing schools for other uses including Community Hubs. The Board can also apply for funding through the Ministry’s Capital Priorities program.

The Ministry does not outline the number of excess pupil places that need to be eliminated in order request funding. Requests for funding for capital projects are evaluated by the Ministry of Education on a case-by-case basis, and there is no guarantee of funding approval.

Has the Board considered opening a new school between the Downtown Core and current Aldershot facility?

No. To construct any new school or additions to existing facilities, the Board must submit a business case to the Ministry of Education to request funding. The Ministry would review the business case to determine whether an immediate need is present to proceed with funding of such a project. Given the number of empty pupil places currently available south of the QEW/Highway 403, the Ministry would require that the Board undertake a PAR.

How long does it take to build an addition to a building? (New: Mar. 7, 2017)

This is dependent on a number of factors. Having sufficient funds to undertake the additions and/or renovations, which could potentially come from Ministry of Education funding, or through Proceeds of Disposition (sale of property). Once funding is in place, time is required to undertake the appropriate design, and for building permit and site plan permits approvals from the City of Burlington. It should be noted that, any plans would be initiated as soon as decision is made by the Board, with respect to any school closures.

Will the PARC be provided with financial costs for school upgrades to meet AODA compliance by 2025? (Revised: Mar. 7, 2017)

HDSB has completed the process to assess the needs and costs for all the schools to meet accessibility requirements. The Facility Audit for Accessibility Report is available under Meeting Materials for PARC Working Meeting #4 in the Program and Accommodation Review Committee (PARC) webpage.

Will the Board promise not to sell any property?

The Board reviews its needs and space requirements regularly. If there are properties not in use and not required for the Board’s purposes in the long term, then the Board will decide to declare a property as surplus to its needs. Surplus properties will be disposed according to Ontario Regulation 444/98 Disposition of Surplus Real Property. Please see question below regarding process for surplus property disposition for a brief overview of the process.

Will closed schools be sold to condo or other developers?

The Halton District School Board is not closing schools with the intention to sell the property for condos or other developers. The purpose of this PAR is to address the challenges faced by secondary schools due to low enrolments and to reorganize schools in order to provide better program offerings and learning opportunities for all students.

In the spirit of keeping public properties in the public realm, all school boards are required to follow the legislative process stated in Ontario Regulation 444/98 Disposition of Surplus Real Property. The Halton District School Board is required to first circulate a proposal to sell, lease or otherwise dispose of real property to a number public agencies, including:

  • Co-terminus school boards;
  • Post-secondary institutions;
  • Municipalities;
  • Province of Ontario; and,
  • Government of Canada.

If no public agencies express interest in the property, only then can the Board proceed to selling property to private organizations. The Board of Trustees must approve the initiation of this process.

Will closing a school decrease our property value?

Based on our understanding and experience, there is no impact. In the current Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area real estate climate, it is questionable if school closing will impact property values.

A study was undertaken by the Toronto District School Board in 2008 titled, “Evaluating the Impact of School Closings on Residential Property Values of Existing Housing in the Vicinity”, by Murtaza Haider, dated Oct 30, 2008. The study presented an analysis of the impact of local housing prices after three schools were closed by the Toronto District School Board. The paper concluded that “the change in land-use from educational uses to institutional, or residential land-uses at the afore-mentioned schools sites (Edithvale PS, Humber Heights PS and York Mills PS) did not have an adverse impact on the price of neighbouring housing units” (page 1). This study can be applied to Burlington context as well.

Enrolment Projection Methodology

Where can I learn more about the enrolment projections?​

The Board annually releases a Long Term Accommodation Plan, which provides an in depth analysis of the future and current enrolments for each school in the Halton region.

Please see Burlington Review Areas section of the Long Term Accommodation Plan to view only enrolment projections specific to Burlington schools. Secondary school enrolment projections are provided in pg. 73-80.

Are students from specialized programs, such as English as a Second Language (ESL), International Baccalaureate (IB) and Gifted, included in the projections?

Yes. Students from specialized programs, such as English as a Second Language (ESL), International Baccalaureate (IB) and Gifted, are included in the projections under English (ENG).

Is development considered in the enrolment projections?

Yes. As a part of the Planning Act, the Halton District School Board is circulated on all residential development plans by municipalities. The type and number of units is included within the information shared by the municipality. The Planning department utilizes the information on units and phasing in developing enrolment projections.

The HDSB Planning Department is in regular communication with municipalities and developers to track development and unit occupancy.

What number of new development units are included in the Board’s enrolment projections? (New: Feb. 2, 2017) 

5603 new development units have been included in the Nov 2016 projections for all Burlington secondary schools.

Are projections based on census data?

No. Projections are based on a various of sources of data, including but not limited to:

  • Current and historic enrolment data
  • Circulated development plans
  • Regional birth data

Projection methodology can be found on in the methodology section of the Long Term Accommodation Plan.

How is the Board more confident with the enrolment projections for Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS now?

Initial projections for Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS were based on data available before the new school was built. At that time, the Board did not have established historical trends or additional data to support deviations from projections.

Following the opening of a new school and with each successive year, historic trends can be established and additional information regarding the new community become available. This includes students from other school boards or private schools now opting to attend the new HDSB school, as well as changes in the percentage of students from HDSB feeder schools who now prefer to stay within HDSB for secondary school, or attend the new school rather than attend a different HDSB secondary school through Out of Area Transfer Request​.

From the 2011-2015 LTAPs, the Board’s projections for Burlington Central HS have been revised. What is causing this upward revision? Is the catchment area attracting more students than projected in the Board’s model? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

There are several factors which can include:

  • Increase in the number of students returning for a fifth year;
  • Increase in the number of students in regional programs, such as English Language Learners;
  • Additional development applications on file - additional 1240 units; Increase number of students from other schools within HDSB, as well as new students from HCDSB and/or other schools;
  • Update of student yields.

In addition, the decline in students has slowed from 2010 to 2014, along with the changes in other variables. Overall, this creates a growth in projections.

Robert Bateman HS’s enrolment has been revised downward from 2011 to 2015 LTAPs. What is causing this huge downward revision? What is happening in this catchment area for such a dramatic decrease to occur and why didn’t the Board include this in projections? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

Secondary students living in the Orchard area (north of the QEW) from John William Boich PS, Orchard Park PS and Alexander’s PS, were directed to Robert Bateman HS prior to the opening of Dr. Frank J. Hayden in 2013. The 2011 projection did not include projections for Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS as boundary for this school was not established until 2013.

Have the approved changes to FI program delivery from grade 1 FI entry at 50% intensity to grade 2 FI entry at 100% intensity been incorporated in the enrolment projections? (Revised: Mar. 2, 2017)

The 2017/2018 school year will be the start of the FI program transition, with the elimination of grade 1 FI intake (50% French, 50% English instruction), and no intake into grade 2. In 2018-2019 FI program entry will begin in grade 2 (100% French).

The projections do include lower enrolments at Pineland PS (FI) and increased enrolments at Mohawk Gardens PS (ENG) and Frontenac PS (ENG). Since 2018-2019 will be the first year where students will be accepted into 100% French Immersion (grade 2 entry), there is no evidence how parent(s) will react to this change. An assumption has been made; i.e. elementary schools with a historically high percentage of SK students entering grade 1 FI will have a higher than average number of grade 1 students entering FI in grade 2, and elementary schools with a historically low percentage of SK students entering grade 1 FI will have a lower than average number of grade 1 students entering FI in grade 2. The change in FI programming to Grade 2 will begin to impact secondary school enrolments in 2024-2025. The assumption is that overall there will be the same number of total students (ENG+FI) and the change will be phased (affect one grade at a time).

Alton West 510-03/03 School Boundary Review

As a part of the school boundary review for the new Alton West subdivision, why does the recommendation redirect students from the area to M.M. Robinson HS? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

The recommended option (which was approved on February 1, 2017 by the Board) was selected to reduce the number of transitions for students in the Alton West development, and support the establishment of boundaries prior to first occupancy. If students were directed to Lester B. Pearson HS, then students in the Alton West development would be required to attend elementary schools that currently feed into Lester B. Pearson HS in order to minimize split cohorts. The steering committee reviewed option for the Alton West area that included the following feeder schools to Lester B. Pearson HS: Dr. Charles Best PS, C.H. Norton PS and Sir E. MacMillan PS.

If options to direct students to Lester B. Pearson HS were selected, then students would need to attend its feeder elementary schools. 2 elementary options with secondary students going to Lester B. Pearson HS were reviewed:

Elementary Option 7: This option would see English program elementary students redirected to Sir E. MacMillan PS (K-Gr.8). However, student that opt for FI would see 3 transitions, i.e. Sir E. MacMillan PS (JK-Gr.1), Clarksdale PS (Gr. 2-6), Rolling Meadows PS (Gr. 7-8), and M.M. Robinson HS (Gr. 9-12). This option was not selected as it would require portable classrooms over the long term at Sir E. MacMillan PS, and cause the fragmentation of the community in terms of number of schools the community would be attending and transitions required.

Elementary Option 8: This option would see 2 transitions for English program elementary students, as students would be redirected to Dr. Charles Best PS (JK-Gr.5), Sir E. MacMillan PS (Gr.6-8), then Lester B. Pearson HS. However, student that opt for FI would see 4 transitions, i.e. Dr. Charles Best (JK-Gr.1), Clarksdale PS (Gr. 2-6), Rolling Meadows PS (Gr. 7-8), and M.M. Robinson HS (Gr. 9-12). This option was not selected as it would require portable classrooms over the long term at Dr. Charles Best PS, and cause the fragmentation of the community in terms of number of schools the community would be attending and transitions required.

The recommended option (as approved on February 1, 2017) with redirection of secondary students to M.M. Robinson HS as it provides for students to attend the same schools, regardless of their program (i.e., English or French Immersion), provide balanced enrolment in the area, does not require the placement of portables on respective school sites, maintains stable and long-term boundaries, minimizes the number of transitions for students and keeps cohorts and families together.

More information regarding this review, including options discussed, are available at Alton West 510-03/03 Subdivision Boundary Review.

Where do I find more information about the Alton West 510-03/03 Subdivision Boundary Review? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

More information regarding this review, including options discussed, are available at Alton West 510-03/03 Subdivision Boundary Review.

Future Growth and Intensification

Our community is in transition, seniors are moving to condos and young families are moving into the community. Will this have an impact on enrolment projections for secondary schools in Burlington?

Yes, communities are in transition. These transitions enable most communities to maintain their current enrolments. We account for these changes in our projections by adding growth in key grades and reviewing all grades for growth patterns.

Enrolment in Halton is growing, so why are schools recommended for closure?

Halton Region comprises of four municipalities, Milton, Oakville, Halton Hills and Burlington. Enrolment growth is largely occurring in Milton and Oakville.

In Burlington, elementary enrolments are projected to decline over the next 10 years by by 808 students, with annual growth in the range of 0% to -2%. Secondary enrolments are projected to remain relatively flat over the next 10 years with an enrolment in the range of 5380 to 5355 and an annual growth range of -2% to 2% annually. However, most of the secondary growth is attributed to one school, which is Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS. Please see the 2015-2016 Long Term Accommodation Plan for projection details.

The population in Burlington is growing, so why are schools recommended for closure?

Population in the City of Burlington is growing, however growth is not evenly spread throughout the city. Most of the residential growth is occurring in Northeast Burlington, which is resulting in the growth of the secondary student population in the Dr. Frank J. Hayden SS school catchment only. The other communities in Burlington are declining in population, which is resulting in stable or declining enrolments at other schools.

How will Burlington’s popularity, especially as a place to raise children, impact enrolment population and enrolment projections? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

It is expected that in existing neighbourhoods, new residents will replace residents that chose to move to other homes. This has been considered in our projections. Moreover, if there were no transitions of new families moving into a neighbourhood/community, the cohort of students would all graduate out of school, with no new students replacing them. Resulting in zero students entering the system.

Beyond this regular transition, additional residents to the city would require the construction of new residential units. The type of new residential units available in the City will have an effect whether families with school-aged, including secondary school students, will move into new homes. Low Density (single detached and semi-detached units) yield the highest number of students, Medium Density (townhouses) will yield less students than low density development. High density development (Apartment Type units) yields the lowest number of students. In order to include additional development into the enrolments, the school board will need to know the type of units and numbers of units. At this time, details are not available.

Why is there such a big discrepancy between what the Board highlights in the LTAP, a total of 278 units mentioned, and what is currently being planned by the City of Burlington - over 1,864 units and a potential of an additional 2000 units in a 5 – 10 year timeframe? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

The LTAP highlighted the new development plans received in 2015. The projections include all planned development received in 2015 and prior. New developments will be added to projections as they are circulated to the Board by the City of Burlington.

Why is the Director’s Preliminary Report mute with respect to the primary intensification areas where the majority of the city’s forecasted population growth will take place between now and 2031?

The Board has included all circulated development applications in Burlington, as part of the enrolment projections. Any additional applications will be included in future projections. However, it has been our experience where intensification has occurred (i.e. Aldershot Community), there has been no appreciable increase in enrolments within the area, given that high density development does not generate a significant number of students. Currently, our yields indicate for every 1000 high density units an average of 14 secondary students are generated for the HDSB.

Why does the Director’s Preliminary Report not mention the fact that Burlington Central High School is located in a primary intensification area?

The report does not mention any areas of intensification within Burlington. The Official Plan Review has just started and has not yet been approved by the City of Burlington.

How would increased development in the Downtown Core impact the enrolment projections for Burlington Central HS? (New: Feb. 2, 2017)

The intensification identified will typically be in the form of high density development, which will not have a significant impact on the enrolment projections.

Although the City of Burlington is going through an Official Plan review process, which will likely result in changes and direction with respect to intensification, nothing has yet been approved by the City. Although the City is moving forward with approvals this year, this does not preclude the potential for objections from the broader community and ensuing appeals, especially from developers. The timeframe for this plan is over the next 15 years.

Moreover, the issue at hand is that there are no tangible numbers of residential units that are being proposed, just population numbers. These population numbers do not provide Board Planning Staff with any benefit in terms of enrolment projections moving forward. However, we can assume that the intensification will be of the higher density type of residential unit and typically the Board does not see a significant number of secondary students generated from these developments.

For example, the following identifies the HDSB experience of high density infill/intensification in one community in Burlington, which is Aldershot:

  • Since 2006, there have been approximately 1062 high density units built in the community. This does not include retirement and senior’s care developments that have been built in the area. Of the 1062 high density residential units built, the HDSB has only seen 14 secondary students generated from these developments as of 2016.

The intensification in other cities in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) has resulted in the same low secondary student yields for other school boards:

  • Downtown Mississauga, has approximately 14,781 high density residential units. From these units, the Peel District School Board has seen approximately 264 secondary students generated.
  • In Toronto, more specifically the Waterfront/Liberty Village area, approximately 21,172 medium and high density units have been built. From these units, only 156 secondary students have been generated for the Toronto District School Board.

The conclusion can be made that notwithstanding the proposed intensification moving forward with the City of Burlington proposed Official Plan Review, the Planning Department does not anticipate any significant generation of secondary students moving forward.

Another fact that Planning Staff would like to point out that moving forward, if using a secondary pupil yield of 27 students per 1000 residential units (assuming 25% medium density and 75% high density), that in order to fill the current 1800 empty pupil places, approximately 66,666 residential units will have to be built in Burlington.

The City of Burlington is currently undergoing an Official Plan Review process, which will likely propose intensification within the existing urban area. How will students from these new developments be accommodated if schools are closed?

Although the City of Burlington is going through an Official Plan review process, which will likely result in changes and direction with respect to intensification, nothing has yet been approved by the City. Although the City is moving forward with approvals this year, this does not preclude the potential for objections from the broader community and ensuing appeals, especially from developers. The timeframe for this plan is over the next 15 years.

Moreover, the issue at hand is that there are no tangible numbers of residential units that are being proposed, just population numbers. These population numbers do not provide Board Planning Staff with any benefit in terms of enrolment projections moving forward. However, we can assume that the intensification will be of the higher density type of residential unit and typically the Board does not see a significant number of secondary students generated from these developments.

For example, the following identifies the HDSB experience of high density infill/intensification in one community in Burlington, which is Aldershot:

  • Since 2006, there have been approximately 1062 high density units built in the community. This does not include retirement and senior’s care developments that have been built in the area. Of the 1062 high density residential units built, the HDSB has only seen 14 secondary students generated from these developments as of 2016.

The intensification in other cities in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) has resulted in the same low secondary student yields for other school boards:

  • Downtown Mississauga, has approximately 14,781 high density residential units. From these units, the Peel District School Board has seen approximately 264 secondary students generated.
  • In Toronto, more specifically the Waterfront/Liberty Village area, approximately 21,172 medium and high density units have been built. From these units, only 156 secondary students have been generated for the Toronto District School Board.

The conclusion can be made that notwithstanding the proposed intensification moving forward with the City of Burlington proposed Official Plan Review, the Planning Department does not anticipate any significant generation of secondary students moving forward.

Another fact that Planning Staff would like to point out that moving forward, if using a secondary pupil yield of 27 students per 1000 residential units (assuming 25% medium density and 75% high density), that in order to fill the current 1800 empty pupil places, approximately 66,666 residential units will have to be built in Burlington.

City of Burlington is looking to promote growth through intensification. Would the Board not need the capacity to house these students?

The intensification identified will typically be in the form of high density development, which do not generate very many secondary students. The Board will need to consider that there is some built capacity in the existing schools that may remain open to accommodate any of this growth.

Why is it that the Board is looking at closing secondary schools, when the Halton Catholic District School Board is seeing growth in south Burlington?

The Halton Catholic District School Board (HCDSB) is not experiencing enrolment growth in south Burlington. In fact enrolments in their secondary schools are projected to decline over the next 10 years. Moreover, an information report to the HCDSB Board of Trustees dated September 6, 2016, staff indicated that they are anticipating a Pupil Accommodation Review process for HCDSB Burlington Secondary Schools by the 2017/2018 school year.

Additional Information 

Glossary of Planning Terms
​
Board Office

Halton District School Board
J.W. Singleton Education Centre
2050 Guelph Line
Burlington, Ontario, L7P 5A8

Numbers

Phone: 905-335-3663
Fax: 905-335-9802

Links
Email Us
A to Z ServicesAccessibilityContact UsTransportationFeedbackStaffCareers
​​​​​​​​© 2023 Halton District School Board, 2050 Guelph Line, Burlington, ON, Canada L7P 5A8, Phone Switchboard: 905-335-3663

Auto Attendant: 905-335-3665, ​Toll Free: 1-877-618-3456, Fax: 905-335-9802