Waste – FCPS School Facilities

[Anonymous]

Just a few of the wasteful spending examples of FCPS facilities planning:

West Potomac being expanded to a design capacity of 3000 students (from 2231). Most recent CIP only projects enrollment to reach 2700 (not much of an increase from current enrollment). Meanwhile, there is plenty of room – approximately 500 seats – next door at Mount Vernon that could absorb the overcrowding at West Potomac. Mount Vernon has a design capacity of 2451 and is only projected to reach 1940 students. Wasteful.

In the 2005 – 2010 timeframe Lee (Lewis) underwent its last renovation and the design capacity was increased from approximately 1800 to 2139. In 2005 the enrollment was approximately 2100. As the renovation was finishing the county opened South County and moved some students from Lee to South County. It also moved approximately 160 students to West Springfield. The Lee expansion immediately became unneeded as the enrollment dropped from 2100 to 1800 and has sunk since then to around 1700. It has an excess capacity of around 440 seats. Wasteful.

Meanwhile, next door at West Springfield HS, the county originally said they were expanding the design capacity from 2160 to 2300 (2016-2020 CIP). A couple of years later, in the 2018-2022 CIP, the design capacity increased to 2350. And in the 2021 -2025 CIP, the design capacity grew to 2505. FCPS advertised one capacity enhancement and grew it substantially. It seems they wanted to ensure that no students would have to be moved to Lewis. Even with those capacity enhancements, West Springfield is projected to be over capacity in 2026 with 2648 students – 958 more students than Lewis is projected to have (1690). Excess capacity at Lewis while increasing the expansion of West Springfield is wasteful.

Springfield Estates underwent a renovation that increased the design capacity from around 655 to 904. Springfield Estates is an AAP center. About the time the renovation was completed, it was decided that Bush Hill (in the Edison pyramid) would add an AAP center that would pull some students out of Springfield Estates. Now in 2026, Springfield Estates is only projected to have 517 students – less than the original capacity before the renovation (by 138 seats). Meanwhile, Bush Hill requires modulars to handle the extra students. Wasteful.

Hybla Valley is in the process of a renovation that will expand its capacity to over 1000 (from around 750). Meanwhile, Bucknell nearby has been operating at around 40% of program capacity for a number of years. It has a design capacity of 906 but operates with under 300 students – so less than 33% of design capacity. In addition, Belle View is also nearby and in 2026 is projected to have only 340 students (54% of capacity). Why expand Hybla Valley when there are available seats nearby? Wasteful.

These are just some examples of wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars. I’m sure others can provide more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just a few of the wasteful spending examples of FCPS facilities planning:

West Potomac being expanded to a design capacity of 3000 students (from 2231). Most recent CIP only projects enrollment to reach 2700 (not much of an increase from current enrollment). Meanwhile, there is plenty of room – approximately 500 seats – next door at Mount Vernon that could absorb the overcrowding at West Potomac. Mount Vernon has a design capacity of 2451 and is only projected to reach 1940 students. Wasteful.

In the 2005 – 2010 timeframe Lee (Lewis) underwent its last renovation and the design capacity was increased from approximately 1800 to 2139. In 2005 the enrollment was approximately 2100. As the renovation was finishing the county opened South County and moved some students from Lee to South County. It also moved approximately 160 students to West Springfield. The Lee expansion immediately became unneeded as the enrollment dropped from 2100 to 1800 and has sunk since then to around 1700. It has an excess capacity of around 440 seats. Wasteful.

Meanwhile, next door at West Springfield HS, the county originally said they were expanding the design capacity from 2160 to 2300 (2016-2020 CIP). A couple of years later, in the 2018-2022 CIP, the design capacity increased to 2350. And in the 2021 -2025 CIP, the design capacity grew to 2505. FCPS advertised one capacity enhancement and grew it substantially. It seems they wanted to ensure that no students would have to be moved to Lewis. Even with those capacity enhancements, West Springfield is projected to be over capacity in 2026 with 2648 students – 958 more students than Lewis is projected to have (1690). Excess capacity at Lewis while increasing the expansion of West Springfield is wasteful.

Springfield Estates underwent a renovation that increased the design capacity from around 655 to 904. Springfield Estates is an AAP center. About the time the renovation was completed, it was decided that Bush Hill (in the Edison pyramid) would add an AAP center that would pull some students out of Springfield Estates. Now in 2026, Springfield Estates is only projected to have 517 students – less than the original capacity before the renovation (by 138 seats). Meanwhile, Bush Hill requires modulars to handle the extra students. Wasteful.

Hybla Valley is in the process of a renovation that will expand its capacity to over 1000 (from around 750). Meanwhile, Bucknell nearby has been operating at around 40% of program capacity for a number of years. It has a design capacity of 906 but operates with under 300 students – so less than 33% of design capacity. In addition, Belle View is also nearby and in 2026 is projected to have only 340 students (54% of capacity). Why expand Hybla Valley when there are available seats nearby? Wasteful.

These are just some examples of wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars. I’m sure others can provide more.

OK, are you new to NoVA. In the next 5-10 years the schools you mentioned could have increased capacities again due to future changes.

[Anonymous]

You prefer the Arlington model where they reduce capacity during renovation. However, when enrollment increases, the new school building is immediately overcrowded. But at least there was a short period of non-wastefulness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You prefer the Arlington model where they reduce capacity during renovation. However, when enrollment increases, the new school building is immediately overcrowded. But at least there was a short period of non-wastefulness.

They are expanding and growth is not following - particularly in the southeast part of the county. I would prefer they restrain the expansions when there is available space nearby. Some of this is egregious. Simply done to avoid changing boundaries - I don't think that can be denied.

[Anonymous]

Join FPAC. What’s the point of posting on DCUM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Join FPAC. What’s the point of posting on DCUM?

FPAC can't help. This is a School Board problem. No will to make boundary changes. Posting here, while probably not too helpful, might draw some attention. Also a way to see if other people are noticing the same problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Join FPAC. What’s the point of posting on DCUM?

FPAC can't help. This is a School Board problem. No will to make boundary changes. Posting here, while probably not too helpful, might draw some attention. Also a way to see if other people are noticing the same problems.

A portion of the now WSHS boundary did go to Lee/Lewis and parents fought to be in WSHS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You prefer the Arlington model where they reduce capacity during renovation. However, when enrollment increases, the new school building is immediately overcrowded. But at least there was a short period of non-wastefulness.

They are expanding and growth is not following - particularly in the southeast part of the county. I would prefer they restrain the expansions when there is available space nearby. Some of this is egregious. Simply done to avoid changing boundaries - I don't think that can be denied.

The school buildings are old and will be renovated. It makes sense to add extra space during renovation that isn't needed than to "restrain" expansion when space may be needed in the next 10-20 years (or later). School buildings are on a 50 year cycle - enrollment could increase or decrease a lot in the coming decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Join FPAC. What’s the point of posting on DCUM?

FPAC can't help. This is a School Board problem. No will to make boundary changes. Posting here, while probably not too helpful, might draw some attention. Also a way to see if other people are noticing the same problems.

A portion of the now WSHS boundary did go to Lee/Lewis and parents fought to be in WSHS.

If they decide to close Lewis or make it into a magnet-only school, then more families will move to the surrounding HSs. Is that a problem? Or a solution?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Join FPAC. What’s the point of posting on DCUM?

FPAC can't help. This is a School Board problem. No will to make boundary changes. Posting here, while probably not too helpful, might draw some attention. Also a way to see if other people are noticing the same problems.

A portion of the now WSHS boundary did go to Lee/Lewis and parents fought to be in WSHS.

If they decide to close Lewis or make it into a magnet-only school, then more families will move to the surrounding HSs. Is that a problem? Or a solution?

I didn’t know that was possible. But I was thinking that trying to move families from WSHS back to Lewis won’t go over well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Join FPAC. What’s the point of posting on DCUM?

FPAC can't help. This is a School Board problem. No will to make boundary changes. Posting here, while probably not too helpful, might draw some attention. Also a way to see if other people are noticing the same problems.

A portion of the now WSHS boundary did go to Lee/Lewis and parents fought to be in WSHS.

If they decide to close Lewis or make it into a magnet-only school, then more families will move to the surrounding HSs. Is that a problem? Or a solution?

That idea has been bandied about for like 10 years and has yet to come to fruition so I don’t think it’s going to happen. They don’t care if a high school isn’t meeting standards anymore, especially after Covid when the expectations are in the basement anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Join FPAC. What’s the point of posting on DCUM?

FPAC can't help. This is a School Board problem. No will to make boundary changes. Posting here, while probably not too helpful, might draw some attention. Also a way to see if other people are noticing the same problems.

A portion of the now WSHS boundary did go to Lee/Lewis and parents fought to be in WSHS.

If they decide to close Lewis or make it into a magnet-only school, then more families will move to the surrounding HSs. Is that a problem? Or a solution?

That idea has been bandied about for like 10 years and has yet to come to fruition so I don’t think it’s going to happen. They don’t care if a high school isn’t meeting standards anymore, especially after Covid when the expectations are in the basement anyway.

The pandemic interrupted things, that's true, but eventually we're going to go back to caring about meeting standards and being accredited. They may revisit these proposals in the next 2-5 years, if accreditation again comes into question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Join FPAC. What’s the point of posting on DCUM?

FPAC can't help. This is a School Board problem. No will to make boundary changes. Posting here, while probably not too helpful, might draw some attention. Also a way to see if other people are noticing the same problems.

A portion of the now WSHS boundary did go to Lee/Lewis and parents fought to be in WSHS.

If they decide to close Lewis or make it into a magnet-only school, then more families will move to the surrounding HSs. Is that a problem? Or a solution?

Quite the conundrum- the same folks who think Lewis is a “waste” because it’s “underenrolled” (which if you’ve been inside during a school day you know isn’t really the case*) are the same ones who would literally soil themselves if the Lewis student body were dispersed to their school.

*Someone who actually works inside a school daily should be the one who determines actual capacity because the numbers central office comes up with are mostly fictional.

[Anonymous]

Langley’s big expansion was also wasteful. School deserved to be renovated but he unilaterally upped the accompaniment expansion up to 2370 seats.

But that was Jeff Platenberg’s philosophy - spend as much money as possible on as few projects as possible, regardless of the actual need. More money in the pockets of building contractors and fewer projects to monitor. Deeply incompetent and venal.

[Anonymous]

^ accompanying