It was the large number of children that drew Marcy Sotirchos and her family to the Glenview neighborhood just south of Glenview Road and West of Harlem Avenue.

Her son’s friends living within walking distance, and they see each other every day at Hoffman School, a walk or bike ride away from the Sotirchos home.

But if officials in Glenview Public School District 34 follow a consultant’s suggestion to shift school attendance boundaries, those friends would attend different schools even though they live in the same close-knit neighborhood.

Michael Nicholson, deputy superintendent of Glenview Public School District 34, leads a small group discussion Thursday at Springman Middle School. (Jeff Danna, Tribune reporter)

“It’s an emotional thing, and we’re trying to be rational,” Sotirchos said.

Sotirchos wasn’t alone in her concerns when District 34 parents visited Springman Middle School recently to ask questions and acquire information about the work of the district’s Boundary Committee.

Since October, that group of teachers, administrators, Board of Education members and a community member has been studying enrollment data and analyzing potential solutions to issues created by larger than expected increases in student population at some schools.

The committee partnered with consulting firm RSP and Associates, which has provided additional enrollment and demographic data. Recently, the firm presented several concepts for potential solutions that included a combination of attendance boundary changes, class size increases and space creation through mobile classrooms.

“This is a draft,” RSP representative Mark Porter told the audience Jan. 27, attempting to quell suspicions that district officials had already made up their minds. “No decisions have been made.”

But it was a recent scenario that Board of Education and Boundary Committees expressed interest in exploring further that raised concerns among parents at the meeting.

Known as “Concept 4,” the scenario involves moving the Westbrook School early childhood education program off site, moving special education from Henking School to Westbrook, and Moving Wesley Day Care from Pleasant Ridge School to Westbrook, said District spokesman and Boundary Committee member Brett Clark.

Details about the concept are scant, because it has only been developed in the past few days, Clark said. However it would likely involve adding mobile classrooms at Glen Grove School, increasing class sizes by one student, and shifting boundaries.

“Due to the late breaking nature of this concept, we don’t know what those areas (affected) would be,” Clark said.

Other concepts, though, show shifts in some neighborhoods, including Sotirchos’. Even after RSP representatives and district officials presented their information and audience members divided into small groups, some parents still felt the boundary changes were a foregone conclusion.

“We just feel like Concept 4 is looking like that’s the concept” the district will select, Julie Reid told Superintendent Gerald Hill, who was leading her small group discussion.

She and other parents questioned why in some conceptual maps the new attendance boundary lines were drawn down side streets rather than main streets that residents see as neighborhood boundaries.

RSP representative Robert Schwarz told attendees at the meeting that the suggested boundaries were drawn to maintain balances in school populations, but this analytical concept triggered an emotional response from parents.

Nicky Stannard said that she was more comfortable with class size increases than boundary changes, reasoning that adding one or two students to a child’s class is better than sending a child to a different school.

“That is such a traumatic thing for a small person,” Stannard said.

Other parents echoed Stannard’s thoughts on class size increases. Several years ago, class size caps in District 34 were reduced, and some parents said they felt comfortable raising them again.

Reid noted that some research shows that class size might not have as big of an impact on learning as some educators and administrators have believed in the past.

Hill concurred, saying that those studies have shown learning only improves when class sizes are smaller than 16 students and worsens when is grows well beyond the sizes in District 34.

“I believe we’re in that tolerance (range),” Hill said.

But the argument against suggested boundary changes always came down to the impact on relationships among neighbors.

To Sotirchos, Hoffman School plays an important role in bringing people together in her neighborhood. Residents often throw neighborhood parties, including Flamingo Fridays in the summer, she said — and everyone knows each other because their children attend the same school and visit each other’s houses.

“They’re telling kids their best friends are going to another school,” Sotirchos said.

The Boundary Committee’s next meeting is scheduled for Feb. 17, and district officials said committee members would discuss input from Thursday’s community input session, as well as another session held Wednesday night.

The committee is scheduled to make a presentation to the Board of Education Feb. 28, and the board could vote on a plan March 7.