What Is Happpening at Spring Hill?

[Anonymous]

It's clear from the boundary map that the areas with apartments are much closer to Spring Hill than many of the Langley neighborhoods.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/boundary-maps/springhilles.pdf

If the Langley parents don't like more kids from apartments at the school, they should ask to be reassigned and stop assuming that other people should change schools to accommodate their whims.

[Anonymous]

That boundary looks to be about the right size distribution going to Langley verses Marshall. Or they could include the entire area north of Route 7 and 123.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley parent here. I think you all are projecting just a bit. Neither I nor any other Langley parents I know would care one way or the other if apartments in and around Tysons were rezoned to Langley. I think many of you like to imagine the Langley community as being this monolithic group, vastly opposed to any rezoning, when in reality, that's simply not the case.

If you have issues with the way in which these areas are zoned, take it up with the SB. Don't smear the Langley community for something we have no control over.

Nice effort to spin, but the majority of the Spring Hill parents agitating to get apartments zoned out of Spring Hill are zoned for Langley. If you want Langley to be viewed more favorably, you should let the School Board know that under-enrolled Cooper and Langley will gladly welcome students from Tysons.

You seem to be the only one spinning (frantically, by the way). "The majority of Spring Hill parents..."?? Are you a Spring Hill parent? How would you possibly know what the "majority" want? Have you polled them? Admit it: you're disgruntled and upset that the zoning isn't going the way you'd like it. I'm actually in the Langley pyramid and know of no one who is "agitating to get apartments zoned out of Spring Hill," or Langley in general. Stop spreading rumors. It only makes you look foolish.

If the SB chooses to rezone apartments to Spring Hill and/or Langley boundaries, so be it. No one's standing in their way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley parent here. I think you all are projecting just a bit. Neither I nor any other Langley parents I know would care one way or the other if apartments in and around Tysons were rezoned to Langley. I think many of you like to imagine the Langley community as being this monolithic group, vastly opposed to any rezoning, when in reality, that's simply not the case.

If you have issues with the way in which these areas are zoned, take it up with the SB. Don't smear the Langley community for something we have no control over.

Nice effort to spin, but the majority of the Spring Hill parents agitating to get apartments zoned out of Spring Hill are zoned for Langley. If you want Langley to be viewed more favorably, you should let the School Board know that under-enrolled Cooper and Langley will gladly welcome students from Tysons.

So, by "majority" you mean you and your friends or "everyone" you know? Not very convincing.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's clear from the boundary map that the areas with apartments are much closer to Spring Hill than many of the Langley neighborhoods.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/boundary-maps/springhilles.pdf

If the Langley parents don't like more kids from apartments at the school, they should ask to be reassigned and stop assuming that other people should change schools to accommodate their whims.

Again: why do you assume it's Langley parents who are directing the zoning to "accommodate their whims"? Do you have evidence of this? Last I checked, the SB - and only the SB - is in charge of zoning. Otherwise, it's just you blowing smoke and clearly demonstrating that huge chip on your shoulder. It obviously makes you feel better to have a scapegoat, when your efforts would be better served lobbying the SB.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear from the boundary map that the areas with apartments are much closer to Spring Hill than many of the Langley neighborhoods.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/boundary-maps/springhilles.pdf

If the Langley parents don't like more kids from apartments at the school, they should ask to be reassigned and stop assuming that other people should change schools to accommodate their whims.

Again: why do you assume it's Langley parents who are directing the zoning to "accommodate their whims"? Do you have evidence of this? Last I checked, the SB - and only the SB - is in charge of zoning. Otherwise, it's just you blowing smoke and clearly demonstrating that huge chip on your shoulder. It obviously makes you feel better to have a scapegoat, when your efforts would be better served lobbying the SB.

Because your School Board member keeps bringing up the purported "concerns" of Spring Hill parents, and Spring Hill parents alone, and Spring Hill is overwhelmingly a Langley feeder. Interesting that the parents at Westbriar and Westgate are not similarly whining about the prospect of more kids from Tysons apartments or getting School Board members to refer to their "concerns."

You just want this all taken care of behind the scenes without anyone calling attention to your lobbying - just like in 2008 when Langley managed to escape being included in the South Lakes redistricting study. You are so used to getting special treatment that you think it's normal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear from the boundary map that the areas with apartments are much closer to Spring Hill than many of the Langley neighborhoods.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/boundary-maps/springhilles.pdf

If the Langley parents don't like more kids from apartments at the school, they should ask to be reassigned and stop assuming that other people should change schools to accommodate their whims.

Again: why do you assume it's Langley parents who are directing the zoning to "accommodate their whims"? Do you have evidence of this? Last I checked, the SB - and only the SB - is in charge of zoning. Otherwise, it's just you blowing smoke and clearly demonstrating that huge chip on your shoulder. It obviously makes you feel better to have a scapegoat, when your efforts would be better served lobbying the SB.

Because your School Board member keeps bringing up the purported "concerns" of Spring Hill parents, and Spring Hill parents alone, and Spring Hill is overwhelmingly a Langley feeder. Interesting that the parents at Westbriar and Westgate are not similarly whining about the prospect of more kids from Tysons apartments or getting School Board members to refer to their "concerns."

You just want this all taken care of behind the scenes without anyone calling attention to your lobbying - just like in 2008 when Langley managed to escape being included in the South Lakes redistricting study. You are so used to getting special treatment that you think it's normal.

Oh, good grief. Neither I, nor ANYONE I know, has "lobbied the School Board" in any way, shape, or form. Frankly, I imagine the reference to "concerns of Spring Hill parents" is simply a way for our SB member (are we talking Janie Strauss?) to make us into the scapegoats for her plans. It's much easier to blame it on the pesky parents than to take the heat for her own decisions. Predictably it looks like you're feeding right into that. Sorry you're so bitter, but your energies and rage would be better directed toward the SB member who told you this.

Perhaps you should look into moving since you seem unreasonably upset at the wrong people.

[Anonymous]

I don't have a stake in this, but looking at the map, it makes sense to zone some of the Tysons development to Spring Hill.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's clear from the boundary map that the areas with apartments are much closer to Spring Hill than many of the Langley neighborhoods.

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/boundary-maps/springhilles.pdf

If the Langley parents don't like more kids from apartments at the school, they should ask to be reassigned and stop assuming that other people should change schools to accommodate their whims.

Again: why do you assume it's Langley parents who are directing the zoning to "accommodate their whims"? Do you have evidence of this? Last I checked, the SB - and only the SB - is in charge of zoning. Otherwise, it's just you blowing smoke and clearly demonstrating that huge chip on your shoulder. It obviously makes you feel better to have a scapegoat, when your efforts would be better served lobbying the SB.

Because your School Board member keeps bringing up the purported "concerns" of Spring Hill parents, and Spring Hill parents alone, and Spring Hill is overwhelmingly a Langley feeder. Interesting that the parents at Westbriar and Westgate are not similarly whining about the prospect of more kids from Tysons apartments or getting School Board members to refer to their "concerns."

You just want this all taken care of behind the scenes without anyone calling attention to your lobbying - just like in 2008 when Langley managed to escape being included in the South Lakes redistricting study. You are so used to getting special treatment that you think it's normal.

Oh, good grief. Neither I, nor ANYONE I know, has "lobbied the School Board" in any way, shape, or form. Frankly, I imagine the reference to "concerns of Spring Hill parents" is simply a way for our SB member (are we talking Janie Strauss?) to make us into the scapegoats for her plans. It's much easier to blame it on the pesky parents than to take the heat for her own decisions. Predictably it looks like you're feeding right into that. Sorry you're so bitter, but your energies and rage would be better directed toward the SB member who told you this.

Perhaps you should look into moving since you seem unreasonably upset at the wrong people.

Again, it's a matter of public record that Strauss is telling Facilities Staff they need to be responsive to the "concerns" voiced only by Spring Hill (Langley) parents about having to educate children from more Tysons apartments. No one else is complaining to Strauss and she obviously would not be bringing this up if Spring Hill parents weren't badgering her.

If you don't like the boundaries, you should be the ones to volunteer to move, and not assume that someone else should always bear the burden.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a stake in this, but looking at the map, it makes sense to zone some of the Tysons development to Spring Hill.

We are in Marshall and absolutely do not want more apartments zoned to our high school. My god Langley, Cooper, and Spring Hill can definitely take some of Tysons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a stake in this, but looking at the map, it makes sense to zone some of the Tysons development to Spring Hill.

We are in Marshall and absolutely do not want more apartments zoned to our high school. My god Langley, Cooper, and Spring Hill can definitely take some of Tysons.

+1.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Langley parent here. I think you all are projecting just a bit. Neither I nor any other Langley parents I know would care one way or the other if apartments in and around Tysons were rezoned to Langley. I think many of you like to imagine the Langley community as being this monolithic group, vastly opposed to any rezoning, when in reality, that's simply not the case.

If you have issues with the way in which these areas are zoned, take it up with the SB. Don't smear the Langley community for something we have no control over.

Seriously! Some of our best friends know people who lived in apartments once.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a stake in this, but looking at the map, it makes sense to zone some of the Tysons development to Spring Hill.

We are in Marshall and absolutely do not want more apartments zoned to our high school. My god Langley, Cooper, and Spring Hill can definitely take some of Tysons.

Sorry but Langley homes are very expensive and pay more taxes. You are second.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a stake in this, but looking at the map, it makes sense to zone some of the Tysons development to Spring Hill.

We are in Marshall and absolutely do not want more apartments zoned to our high school. My god Langley, Cooper, and Spring Hill can definitely take some of Tysons.

Sorry but Langley homes are very expensive and pay more taxes. You are second.

Sorry, but FCPS and the County need to make Tysons work well for years to come. Langley's success is second or third or fourth to that goal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't have a stake in this, but looking at the map, it makes sense to zone some of the Tysons development to Spring Hill.

We are in Marshall and absolutely do not want more apartments zoned to our high school. My god Langley, Cooper, and Spring Hill can definitely take some of Tysons.

Sorry but Langley homes are very expensive and pay more taxes. You are second.

Sorry, but FCPS and the County need to make Tysons work well for years to come. Langley's success is second or third or fourth to that goal.

FCPS is projecting Langley will be under-enrolled so the only question is where kids will come from to fill the empty seats. They ought to come from Tysons apartments.