Catchments changing from safest shortest to crow flies - anyone experienced how this changes things?

[alittleteapot]

Our borough, Islington, is changing this year from safest shortest walking distance to as the crow flies for school admissions. They think it's going to change the catchment quite a lot. Just interested if anyone understands better than me how it can change and how it's affected catchment areas elsewhere. (dd starts school next sept hence special interest right now!)

I've not experienced it happening, but thinking about it logically it's likely to affect those currently on the periphary of the "historical" catchment area most.

The families that benefit will be those that have some "obstacle" (natural or otherwise) between them & the school, for example a river, a park (that doesn't meet "safe walking route" rules), a multi storey car park, a large building complex, a major roas to cross etc

Most probably the last few that would have just got in on "safe walking route" will miss out & the first few that would have missed out on "safe walking route" will now get in as it no longer matters that the can't "safely" walk through the park, or it's an extra few metres to walk to the bridge to cross the river.

I expect the LA are doing this to stop people contesting what the distance is and how it is measured, what constitutes a safe route etc, etc. There is very little no argument when it comes to using a GIS measuring address point in school to address point at home, so long as they are measuring from the right property, then the distance is accurate.

Yes, that makes sense. Couldn't get my head round it but you've nailed it. Be interesting to see how it changes the mixes in schools. As we have no obstacles such as the ones you suggest I predict it won't affect which schools we will or won't get into from our house...

Totally agree with BetsyBoop. Whilst the LA is changing it to stop challenges on distances would they be doing it if they knew it was also going to create a lot of problems with changing effective catchment areas with the inevitable parental uproar? I suspect that the answer is no.

I don't really understand why they have done it but it has changed my choice of schools for DD. The one school she wanted to go to is now out of our catchment :(

it's silly really as safest shortest seems a more sound criteria in lots of ways, but I guess as you say they want to stop time consuming challenges from irate parents.

That sounds ridiculous! Where I used to live there would have been a very close school had I slid down a steep embankment, waded through a river, clambered up the other side and negotiated a sheer flat piece of rock!! To actually walk or drive to that same school would have made it the third farthest from my home!

It's really caused havoc around here as we have a big fat railway line running through the area.

it's probably easier to calculate by computer as well I guess

The problem with shortest safe route is that it is vulnerable to challenges from parents who think they have found a shorter route than the one used by the LA. There are often unofficial footpaths that local residents use which don't appear on the maps used by the LA. It ends up with appeal panels having to decide whether or not the route found by the parents is safe. Straight line distances don't have that problem and are much harder for parents to challenge.

I can see why they've done it but it means my no. 1 choice school is now the 3rd furthest from my house although it is the shortest safest route. The one nearest as the crow flies is through a farm with no right of way, you have to walk right round it which makes it twice as far as our first choice school. Our first choice is a faith school so I'm only hoping there are fewer Catholic children for whom it is their nearest school as the crow flies....