Shrevewood Elementary

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no one school solution to Shrevewood, because everything nearby is near or above capacity. They will end up having to divide the excess population between at least Stenwood, Lemon Road, and probably Timber Lane.

Shrevewood feeds to Kilmer/Marshall. Timber Lane feeds to Longfellow/McLean and Jackson/Falls Church.

There are only two elementary schools in FCPS that feed into into three middle schools and only one (Crossfield) that feeds into three high schools. That is a less than ideal situation (and the small part of Crossfield at Rocky Run/Chantilly really ought to go to Carson/Oakton or get reassigned to Lees Corner ES).

If part of Shrevewood were reassigned to Timber Lane, the Longfellow/McLean part of Timber Lane probably would need to move to Kilmer/Marshall to prevent a new three-way split feeder. That would be one way to deal with the overcrowding at McLean, and the Timber Lane area is closer to Marshall than to McLean, but Marshall is near capacity and it’s unlikely this School Board would reassign the area that accounts for most of the economic diversity at McLean.

So it is highly unlikely any part of Shrevewood will get moved to Timber Lane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no one school solution to Shrevewood, because everything nearby is near or above capacity. They will end up having to divide the excess population between at least Stenwood, Lemon Road, and probably Timber Lane.

Nope. It’s just part of Shrevewood to Stenwood and, if necessary, part of Stenwood to Freedom Hill.

This makes sense but it would have to move some to Freedom Hill to work, there is not enough capacity at Stenwood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no one school solution to Shrevewood, because everything nearby is near or above capacity. They will end up having to divide the excess population between at least Stenwood, Lemon Road, and probably Timber Lane.

Nope. It’s just part of Shrevewood to Stenwood and, if necessary, part of Stenwood to Freedom Hill.

This makes sense but it would have to move some to Freedom Hill to work, there is not enough capacity at Stenwood.

Freedom Hill is projected to be 23% under capacity in 2024, so it has space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Freedom Hill is projected to be 23% under capacity in 2024, so it has space.

I saw that in the CIP today, and it makes me worry that instead of rezoning kids from Shrevewood to Stenwood, then Stenwood to Freedom Hill, they would just try to rezone those of us along Idylwood near Pimmit Drive to Freedom Hill, since the apartments off of Pimmit Drive are already zoned for that school. That would probably force us to move (not to mention drive down our property value) because both DH and I work in DC and it would require us to drive through Tysons traffic to pick up from SACC and then back home through Tysons traffic. That could add over 30 minutes to the commute of whoever is doing SACC pickup.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Freedom Hill is projected to be 23% under capacity in 2024, so it has space.

I saw that in the CIP today, and it makes me worry that instead of rezoning kids from Shrevewood to Stenwood, then Stenwood to Freedom Hill, they would just try to rezone those of us along Idylwood near Pimmit Drive to Freedom Hill, since the apartments off of Pimmit Drive are already zoned for that school. That would probably force us to move (not to mention drive down our property value) because both DH and I work in DC and it would require us to drive through Tysons traffic to pick up from SACC and then back home through Tysons traffic. That could add over 30 minutes to the commute of whoever is doing SACC pickup.

I can understand your concern, but I would push hard to make sure Stenwood gets included within the scope of the boundary study.

If you look at what they are doing with the overcrowding at Glen Forest, they initially proposed to include just 1-2 other schools in the boundary study and are now proposing to include every elementary school in the Justice pyramid as part of that study based on the initial community feedback. I don’t think they need to include every elementary in the Marshall pyramid in a Shrevewood study, but they do need to include Stenwood and Freedom Hill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Freedom Hill is projected to be 23% under capacity in 2024, so it has space.

I saw that in the CIP today, and it makes me worry that instead of rezoning kids from Shrevewood to Stenwood, then Stenwood to Freedom Hill, they would just try to rezone those of us along Idylwood near Pimmit Drive to Freedom Hill, since the apartments off of Pimmit Drive are already zoned for that school. That would probably force us to move (not to mention drive down our property value) because both DH and I work in DC and it would require us to drive through Tysons traffic to pick up from SACC and then back home through Tysons traffic. That could add over 30 minutes to the commute of whoever is doing SACC pickup.

I can understand your concern, but I would push hard to make sure Stenwood gets included within the scope of the boundary study.

If you look at what they are doing with the overcrowding at Glen Forest, they initially proposed to include just 1-2 other schools in the boundary study and are now proposing to include every elementary school in the Justice pyramid as part of that study based on the initial community feedback. I don’t think they need to include every elementary in the Marshall pyramid in a Shrevewood study, but they do need to include Stenwood and Freedom Hill.

Thank you - who should I (and my neighbors) contact to make that request?

[Anonymous]

Honestly, I can't imagine how Stenwood would avoid being part of the boundary review for Shrevewood, given that the apartments on top of Dunn Loring are zoned to Shrevewood yet walking distance to Stenwood.

[Anonymous]

What’s the earliest a change could take effect?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Freedom Hill is projected to be 23% under capacity in 2024, so it has space.

I saw that in the CIP today, and it makes me worry that instead of rezoning kids from Shrevewood to Stenwood, then Stenwood to Freedom Hill, they would just try to rezone those of us along Idylwood near Pimmit Drive to Freedom Hill, since the apartments off of Pimmit Drive are already zoned for that school. That would probably force us to move (not to mention drive down our property value) because both DH and I work in DC and it would require us to drive through Tysons traffic to pick up from SACC and then back home through Tysons traffic. That could add over 30 minutes to the commute of whoever is doing SACC pickup.

I can understand your concern, but I would push hard to make sure Stenwood gets included within the scope of the boundary study.

If you look at what they are doing with the overcrowding at Glen Forest, they initially proposed to include just 1-2 other schools in the boundary study and are now proposing to include every elementary school in the Justice pyramid as part of that study based on the initial community feedback. I don’t think they need to include every elementary in the Marshall pyramid in a Shrevewood study, but they do need to include Stenwood and Freedom Hill.

Thank you - who should I (and my neighbors) contact to make that request?

If I were you I’d go ahead and share my views now with Karl Frisch, the School Board member for Providence; Fabio Zuluaga, the Regional Superintendent for Region 2; and Jeff Platenberg, the head of Facilities and Transportation Services. You should be able to find their email addresses on the fcps.edu web site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I can't imagine how Stenwood would avoid being part of the boundary review for Shrevewood, given that the apartments on top of Dunn Loring are zoned to Shrevewood yet walking distance to Stenwood.

Do not ever assume FCPS will do the obvious or the right thing. They generally do what is most convenient for FCPS staff and/or cheapest in the short term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Freedom Hill is projected to be 23% under capacity in 2024, so it has space.

I saw that in the CIP today, and it makes me worry that instead of rezoning kids from Shrevewood to Stenwood, then Stenwood to Freedom Hill, they would just try to rezone those of us along Idylwood near Pimmit Drive to Freedom Hill, since the apartments off of Pimmit Drive are already zoned for that school. That would probably force us to move (not to mention drive down our property value) because both DH and I work in DC and it would require us to drive through Tysons traffic to pick up from SACC and then back home through Tysons traffic. That could add over 30 minutes to the commute of whoever is doing SACC pickup.

I can understand your concern, but I would push hard to make sure Stenwood gets included within the scope of the boundary study.

If you look at what they are doing with the overcrowding at Glen Forest, they initially proposed to include just 1-2 other schools in the boundary study and are now proposing to include every elementary school in the Justice pyramid as part of that study based on the initial community feedback. I don’t think they need to include every elementary in the Marshall pyramid in a Shrevewood study, but they do need to include Stenwood and Freedom Hill.

Thank you - who should I (and my neighbors) contact to make that request?

If I were you I’d go ahead and share my views now with Karl Frisch, the School Board member for Providence; Fabio Zuluaga, the Regional Superintendent for Region 2; and Jeff Platenberg, the head of Facilities and Transportation Services. You should be able to find their email addresses on the fcps.edu web site.

Thank you!

[Anonymous]

Do you think they will take SES and ESL status into account? Are they going to stick struggling populations in mostly one school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you think they will take SES and ESL status into account? Are they going to stick struggling populations in mostly one school?

Doubt it, but they can add more diversity to Stenwood by moving areas that are close to that school (i.e., it wouldn’t be gerry-meandering).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do you think they will take SES and ESL status into account? Are they going to stick struggling populations in mostly one school?

This is the reason that Shrevewood is zoned the way it is. I hope that they change it by trying to diversify Stenwood. There's NO reason that the apartments near Dunn Loring should have been zoned to Shrevewood in the first place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think they will take SES and ESL status into account? Are they going to stick struggling populations in mostly one school?

This is the reason that Shrevewood is zoned the way it is. I hope that they change it by trying to diversify Stenwood. There's NO reason that the apartments near Dunn Loring should have been zoned to Shrevewood in the first place.

You’d need to go back and look at the enrollments and projected enrollments at the time those boundaries were established before really having a basis to claim there was a concerted effort to load Shrevewood up with lower-income areas. It’s not that different from Freedom Hill or Lemon Road before it was an AAP center.