Straight line distance/as the crow flies

[madmum22]

Hi,

If the LEA use straight line distance (as the crow flies) and they use a GIS system would the result be 100% accurate if using a 2005 map? Thanks

I used to be an expert in GIS (preen preen moment), and I'm trying to look up the attributes of the Transverse Mercator projection used in UK (almost certainly what they used) -- basically, UTP is good for shape and direction but has slight distortion for distance, however probably not large enough for you to change the result significantly (ie, I'm guessing less than 1m).

What is your dispute, that the distance seems very wrong? You can get out an OS map and measure it yourself.

The date of map is not relevant, as long as they have referenced your house and the school correctly on the National Grid (down to the metre, ideally) -- assuming they are using TMP and National Grid system at all, that is.

Ok thanks. Distance comes down to 16 metres closer to allocated school. Yet can walk to first choice school quicker than allocated school.

Ah, that's because road (or pedestrian) distance is rather different from straight line (as the crow flies) distance. I once submitted a short paper about it for a journal and they rejected it as "too obvious" -- but then why do institutions, some academics and similar keep using straight line distance as a proxy?

Oh well.

Madmum,
As long as the datum point on your dwelling and the datum point on the school are correct then the computer systems I have seen used have an accuracy that is to within 1 metre if the LA needs to go that accurate to distingusih between applicants.

I can however believe that a 2005 map is going to be out of date with regard to any new housing. Are you sure that it is a 2005 map or a 2005 map with annual updates?

The honest reason Peanutbutterkid is that a straight line distance is potentially more accurate than any walking or road distance and is far less able to be argued against at any admission appeal.

The 2005 map is what I shall ask the LEA about tomorrow and try and get a answer. On the map it says 2005 and shows a school that was closed in 2005. At the moment LEA expect me to let my 7 year old walk to school on own while I get my younger child to the infant school which is opposite way.

I don't suppose the LA have put in writing that they expect a 7 year old to walk to school on their own have they?

No they haven't but I shall ask them to do so. As a parent I will not allow my 7 year old to walk on his own till he is older. The whole school thing would not be so bad if other children had not got into school that live a lot further away. There local school was not taken into account as it is classed as a all through primary school despite having at least 15 places for year3.

So what is the issue here? That you will have one child at an infant school and another at a separate junior school? Did the children who live further away get a place on the basis of being siblings?

The LEA will not put in writing that they expect a 7 year old to walk to school unaccompanied. If they put anything in writing, I imagine it will be that they apply the school admissions criteria as published and expect parents to make suitable arrangements to get their child(ren) to the allocated school.

I doubt you'll get anywhere arguing about the distance measurement, but if you tell us more about your situation we may be able to suggest something else.

If it helps to know, my friend found that the school secretary had put down the wrong figure for distance to school and submitted to local authority (think she'd transposed two figures). When mistake was realised, friends child was allocated a place at the school, which meant that for a short period, they had acceptances from 31 children for school year. Someone dropped out before September.

It is worth checking what figure they used and how they got it.