To prioritise distance above all other factors in primary choice?

[CalmerChameleons]

For context, my area is low birth rate so I've been told I will get into whichever school I put first, neither have been full for reception in the last couple of years.

I have twins who will start primary school in September.

School A: five minutes walk from my house. Generally seems good, one form entry so no scope to separate DTs if we wanted to at some point, and fewer children there for them both to develop their own friendship groups. If this was my only option I'd be happy with it, BUT

School B: faith school (why I would definitely get in despite greater distance).
I'd always wanted my children to go to a faith school, I know it's wrong/meaningless to some and don't want to get into that debate here but just to note it's important for me.
Absolutely loved the head and the whole ethos of the school, everything that was said on the tour made me think it was perfect for us. Two form entry and they are happy to be flexible about DTs moving between classes depending on their needs for each year (eg maybe start off in same class and move apart when older). It's also a lot more diverse than school A which is a big positive for me. If everything was equal I'd choose this one BUT

It's a 10 minute drive across town if there was no traffic. Realistically, it would mean going through loads of traffic so probably more like 30 mins plus, plus all the faff of two children into a car, parking up near the school etc. It's beyond where I work so would mean if I did drop off/collection it would add extra to my journey and mean it was a bit of a race to get to work on time (and I prefer to cycle or bus and walk rather than drive, neither of these would work with kids). DH works from home a lot so if he did it it would be over an hour round trip Vs ten mins.

I feel mean not sending my kids to the school I think would be perfect, and instead the nearest one which is just fine. But the further one will mean they have to spend less time with us and more time in before/after school care, it means they could never walk themselves when they're in Y5/6. Mornings will involve leaving a lot earlier and more stress, Vs just walking them a few mins up the road.

AIBU to think that it'll be more positive for our lives for them to attend a nearby school rather than a school which might suit them a bit better?

They will need to leave to get to school 30 minutes earlier.

They will get home much later having less down time at home after school and potentially not being able to attend clubs due to the time it takes.

They won't be able to play out after school with their peers.

They won't be able to walk home.

Any events at school will mean either waiting around nearby or driving home and back again.

Anytime they leave something behind either at home or at school the chances of a parent being able to drop it off or quickly nip to collect it is much less than at the school a short walk away.

If you love the faith school that much, would you consider moving?

Of course if it would involve vast stamp duty then that's a no go but if it wouldn't it might be worth thinking about

The walkable school with better logistics wins hands down.

Maybe it’s different in London but we are a 20 min walk to the primary & lots live a bit further away. Doesn’t impact clubs, play dates etc. And kids at prep travel much further.

You’ll be shocked at some of the London secondary journey times!

What are the secondary schools like, are they in different catchments for different secondaries?

From what you've said about school B, I would seriously consider moving house, but only if the new area was in the catchment of a good secondary.

School A will be fine and logistics win so I do think if you can't or don't want to move, just stick with A.

The two situations are not comparable though. A 20 minute walk is still pretty close and even more so somewhere like London with great public transport. A 30 minute drive even if it should only take 10 minutes with no traffic is not comparable to still being able to actually walk to school.

Not necessarily negative.
And on balance it could be worth it. My opinion is that school B would offer a superior experience for their children and therefore worth the journey. Remember OP said it's 10 minutes and 30 minutes worst case traffic

Remember OP said it's 10 minutes and 30 minutes worst case traffic

Op said it was 10 minutes with no traffic. Which isn't ever going to apply to the times she needs to make the journey. Even the Op herself admits it's more likely to be 30 minutes.

I agree with those saying go for the local school. You really don't want to commit to this journey for the next 7+ years.

Thanks for all the responses, given me some great points to consider.

DTs wouldn't contemplate separate classes at the moment but their opinion may change later!

There's a local secondary within walking distance, everyone from school A goes there but school B most go to a different secondary (not a faith one) which is also an awkward drive away. Secondary schools are very similar so I'd definitely prefer the walkable one so they can get there themselves!

It's really hilly here and it's over three miles each way so I don't think I could cycle with them in a trailer and I don't think they'd be able to cycle alone until secondary age. They'd also have to go along the busy road I'd be driving down.

Moving isn't an option unfortunately for a lot of reasons.

It's ten minutes if you did it at 8pm or similar, school time it'd be at least 30 mins (have tested it a few times recently).

That's an hour. Your children your choice.
From what you described to me School B offers the best but it comes at a cost to you and your DH. Your children obviously will be in the car on the journey but they are benefitting from the school.

There is no right or wrong

Despite the issue of not being able to separate the twins I still think A is the best option. The advantage of being able to walk to school (especially the freedom to do that alone once old enough) and the fact that it feeds into the local secondary school will be a huge benefit over the many years in school.

Normally I'd say go for the local school but I think with twins you need to give serious consideration to the other school.

It may not be an issue but depending on personalities you may find twins relying on each other to the exclusion of everyone else, or possibly one twin dominating everything. In a one form entry it will be far harder for both twins to come out of their shell and develop their own friendships etc without relying on their sibling. The friendship pool will be too small.

OP you're the best person to judge this, if you think it's likely they may need to be separated later for the benefit of one or both, better to go with school B from the start. If you think it'll be OK with them in the same class until high school go with the local school and deal with the issue if it comes up.

The thing I wish I'd thought more about is the secondary school. Everyone talks about catchment but the thing where I live that guarantees where you get in at secondary, is which primary school you went to. Check out which secondary is the school they're a feeder school for, for another factor to think about.

The two situations are not comparable though. A 20 minute walk is still pretty close and even more so somewhere like London with great public transport. A 30 minute drive even if it should only take 10 minutes with no traffic is not comparable to still being able to actually walk to school.

The drive is 25 mins which I often do as it’s on the way to work. Traffic & railway lines make it longer than walking. Public transport is longer still & as I said plenty have a longer journey. Funding & resources would be me important to me than journey length.

This is a very important consideration !

As moving isn't an option and school A feeds into the local secondary, which is good and walkable, I'd go with school A.

I think the only way to cycle the school run with that distance would be to get an electric longtail (eg Tern GSD) but even with that I'm not convinced it's worth it.

We cycle to school, nursery and work, and electric bikes are a game changer (we have an electric cargo bike and an electric regular bike) but even so, school is less than a mile away.

@Doppelgangers It won't just be the OP and her husband who suffer though. A 30 minute journey twice a day every day will undoubtedly have an impact on the children.

It really won't. That's a very short commute for most children going to school. Only compared to a 5 min walk does it seem like a task. I don't think nanny of my dc ever had a school less than 30 min away and there were many who travelled longer.

What weird trauma do you think happens?

I think people are not considering the OP has twins and the importance of having the option to be separate and individual which a single form for the whole of primary won't allow for. I think this issue is much more relevant than a very average 30 min commute

Who said anything about trauma?

i said it would have an impact and compared to attending a school 5 minutes walk away it will have an impact on them.

As a twin myself being in a separate class to my sibling or the same class was never really an issue. The OPs already said they wouldn't currently want to be separated, although as I said above if it became an issue then that's a problem which can be dealt with further down the line. It's certainly not worth a 30 minute commute to school given they currently want to be in the same class.

@Doppelgangers what they want at 4 is completely different to what they want at 6. Changing schools part way through is way more destabilising than a regular commute imo

Mumsnet is very anti driving to school. I don't know if it's the demographic on here but most of the people i know (have to) drive to school - we are fairly rural.

I've chosen the 20 minutes drive and parking hassle of a school we liked rather than the 5 minutes drive (40 min walk!) Requires Improvement nearby. It is working out well, although I do dislike the school run.

Of course what they want could change as they grow up but equally there's twins and other multiples up and down the county who spend their whole time at primary in the same class with no issues so they may never need to move.

It seems madness to subject yourself to a 30 minute commute to school each day, spend years rushing and stressing when the school 5 minutes away would be perfectly fine.

Agree, electric bikes are great but if there's a busy road then 3 miles is not going to appeal unless you're a very committed cyclist.

We live in easy cycling distance of my children's school and the ideal would be for me to cycle there and drop them off before carrying on to work. Due to the school run traffic and nowhere practical to leave kids bikes it is easier for me to walk them there then walk back home to get my bike. And the roads are all fairly quiet most of the time and my 4 year old cycles on them at other times, but at school run it's chaos with cars everywhere pulling in and out suddenly. The pavements are too busy for her to cycle on. Very frustrating especially as I know many of the families live within a 10 minute walk and still drive there.

I’d go for School A. You will be making so many trips to and from school over the next 7 years. Go for the easier option. Also nice for them to make friends that are in your immediate neighbourhood.