Boundary Review Meetings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else unable to make comments in the boundary explorer tool?

Did you try on a computer? Worked last night.

It’s not working on mobile or desktop. I’m wondering if they’ve reached their limit for entries.

I also just checked (laptop). It is indeed not working. Submit button will not submit

Scratch that...it just went through

I still can’t get it to work and I’ve tried multiple browsers and devices. Now no one will consider moving the piece of Cub Run that scenario 4 sends to Lees Corner to Brookfield instead. Lees Corner will needlessly be turned into a split feeder when Brooksfield was already one to begin with.

I wrote that comment for this scenario when the tool opened. But now that KAA maps have them moving to Westfield anyway, why don't they just stay at Cub Run?

[Anonymous]

They are going to do all this in 30 minute??

rtually via Zoom on Tuesday, October 28, from 6 to 6:30 p.m. Enter through Door 1. The consultant will present the latest draft map, Scenario 4, and changes specific to the Chantilly and Westfield pyramids. They will also take questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is anyone else unable to make comments in the boundary explorer tool?

Did you try on a computer? Worked last night.

It’s not working on mobile or desktop. I’m wondering if they’ve reached their limit for entries.

I also just checked (laptop). It is indeed not working. Submit button will not submit

Scratch that...it just went through

I still can’t get it to work and I’ve tried multiple browsers and devices. Now no one will consider moving the piece of Cub Run that scenario 4 sends to Lees Corner to Brookfield instead. Lees Corner will needlessly be turned into a split feeder when Brooksfield was already one to begin with.

I wrote that comment for this scenario when the tool opened. But now that KAA maps have them moving to Westfield anyway, why don't they just stay at Cub Run?

They’re sending the Franklin zoned portion of Brookfield to Westfield too, so the only real benefit is the shared MS feeder and not having to cross 28. I guess they could just move that section of Brookfield that feeds to Franklin over to Cub Run too. Stone MS is too small to be Westfield’s sole MS feeder, so another MS will need to take Westfield students. Rocky Run is my guess once they work out all the AAP feeder kinks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the beef that Sangster parents have with LBSS? It’s comparable to WSHS in most ways.

From the meeting:

The LB high school students on the bus. They picked their houses specifically to avoid riding busses with high school students.

Their community is not the Sangster students they attend school with. Their community is the kids from the other WSHS elementary schools that they don't yet know who will be attending Irving and WSHS.

If rezoned, their HOA will feed into 2 middle and high schools (That neighborhood already feeds into 2 elementary schools, 2 middle schools and 2 high schools, but the one West Orange Hunt HOA only feeds into WSHS according to the parents in attendance.)

Even though 1/2 of WSHS votes for 2 school board reps from other magesterial districts (Braddock and Franconia) and Irving sits in the Braddock magesterial district, not the Springfield magesterial district, the Sangster neighborhood votes for the Springfield magesterial district. They expressed that getting moved to LBSS means that they lose their school board representation, because they do not vote for the Braddock rep. I think this one is just a basic misunderstanding of civics and Fairfax County governance, since I believe the only FCPS high school that is represented by only 1 dedicated rep is Fairfax HS. All of the others, including WSHS and LBSS, are represented by at least 2 or 3 school board reps due to jacked up gerrymandering by the Board of Supervisors. The school board representation is a non argument based on county governance structure.


The good points they made:

They specifically purchased their houses knowing the neighborhood was a split feeder, because they specifically wanted to attend Sangster > Irving > WSHS, not LBSS because of the 4 reasons above (high school kids on the busses, the community claim, school board reps, and HOA argument) Rezoning removes their choice.


The best points and most compelling arguments from the Sangster community were made by the 4 Irving students who spoke about grandfathering, the inequity of letting secondary 7th and 8th graders be grandfathered but not allowing the same grandfathering for middle school students, and the biggest point was that the final maps will be released at least a month after 8th students register for classes and audition for classes like orchestra, so those Irving 8th graders will be sitting in limbo for weeks or months, not able to register for high school classes and not knowing what high school they will attend. Bravo to those 4 students for making such strong arguments for yourselves. I am sure your parents are on this forum to pass this on. You should be very proud.


The White Oaks to Cherry Run families were asking that grandfathering be given for entire families through preschool younger siblings, so families don't have to have kids at 2 elementary schools.

In my opinion, that was one of the weakest arguments of the night against rezoning and the weakest grandfathering argument.

One, because of the scope of grandfathering county wide to grandfather all current and future elementary kids with currently enrolled siblings is just too large and encompasses too many years, more years than the entire rezoning cycle.

And two, we all all know that having kids at 2 elementary schools is something FCPS families jump on without a seconds pause when one kid gets into the AAP center programs.

The grandfathering of entire families though 7 years of elementary schools was not a viable request in my opinion.

Others might have viewed my assessment differently, but this was my take on the meeting.

Your second point on White Oaks doesn't stand because affected families bought into an elementary school that is a center, so they were never going to have kids at two schools if the older ones get into AAP.

This is not our school, but few more arguments I picked were different start times and lack of SACC continuity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don’t understand the nuance of these neighborhoods don’t see the community both White oaks and Sangster parents are fighting for. A man with a house on the dividing line made it clear - his neighborhood is walkable for students to visit friends etc but moving him to LBSS makes most of his school. community across the parkway and Lee chapel, eliminating the community aspect. white oaks parents explained that their neighborhood is governed by 3 HOAS that would be split in strange ways, again eliminating the neighborhood community when the students go to different schools.

When these parents talk about community, it’s not the school it’s where their physical house is and the community they see daily, carpool with, walk to friends houses etc. but moving these schools they would no longer be part of that because the natural boundaries are the parkway - and kids aren’t crossing that alone to go play w a friend

I didn't understand that argument. There are no houses in that Sangster area that they're suggested moving in Scenario 4 where the dividing line is between houses. There's a house on Cottontail that's divided from its neighbors down the street in that scenario via Cherry Run Park. But the county usually uses natural boundaries like parks, woods and streams as dividing lines. The argument here is that kids would be able to play with their neighbors, but not other kids who go to their school because they couldn't walk to see them? Isn't that always the case, especially when it comes to middle and high schools? Are kids in that Sangster neighborhood walking up Keene Mill to hang out with their classmates from Daventry at the Plaza?

I understand that no one wants to leave their current school. I wish the county would look at less disruptive options, like their faulty CIP projections, why the number of transfers into "closed to transfers" WSHS has more than doubled in the past few years and residency checks. But FCPS isn't interested in doing any of that.

There’s not a park on cottontail. There is a swath of natural woods, but it’s not a significant space.

Kids from Sangster are walking up and down huntsman and Sydenstricker with their OHES and HVES base peers, some who actually went to Sangster with them in AAP. I’m unsure what Daventry has to do with this. They can safely bike to the many pools in this vicinity to go with friends. They go to the shopping center together and the lake.

What I don't get is that these Sangster kids do not go to elementary school with their neighborhood friends (besides the AAP kids). They do not go to the same ES as their walkable community, which nobody complains about, but then it's a big problem for MS and HS?

I am confused by this too…. The parent who went on and on at the very end about how the Huntsman kids are prepped for the split with the rest of the Sangster friends (they tell their kids, you’ll just have to make new friends)…don’t they realize how that sounds? I get the kids who are already in Irving…I think they should get to stay with their cohort. But the kids still at Sangster? It doesn’t make sense (and I’m literally right down the street and have plenty of school friends on the other side of 286…it’s fine! We drive the 2 minutes to visit).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don’t understand the nuance of these neighborhoods don’t see the community both White oaks and Sangster parents are fighting for. A man with a house on the dividing line made it clear - his neighborhood is walkable for students to visit friends etc but moving him to LBSS makes most of his school. community across the parkway and Lee chapel, eliminating the community aspect. white oaks parents explained that their neighborhood is governed by 3 HOAS that would be split in strange ways, again eliminating the neighborhood community when the students go to different schools.

When these parents talk about community, it’s not the school it’s where their physical house is and the community they see daily, carpool with, walk to friends houses etc. but moving these schools they would no longer be part of that because the natural boundaries are the parkway - and kids aren’t crossing that alone to go play w a friend

I didn't understand that argument. There are no houses in that Sangster area that they're suggested moving in Scenario 4 where the dividing line is between houses. There's a house on Cottontail that's divided from its neighbors down the street in that scenario via Cherry Run Park. But the county usually uses natural boundaries like parks, woods and streams as dividing lines. The argument here is that kids would be able to play with their neighbors, but not other kids who go to their school because they couldn't walk to see them? Isn't that always the case, especially when it comes to middle and high schools? Are kids in that Sangster neighborhood walking up Keene Mill to hang out with their classmates from Daventry at the Plaza?

I understand that no one wants to leave their current school. I wish the county would look at less disruptive options, like their faulty CIP projections, why the number of transfers into "closed to transfers" WSHS has more than doubled in the past few years and residency checks. But FCPS isn't interested in doing any of that.

There’s not a park on cottontail. There is a swath of natural woods, but it’s not a significant space.

Kids from Sangster are walking up and down huntsman and Sydenstricker with their OHES and HVES base peers, some who actually went to Sangster with them in AAP. I’m unsure what Daventry has to do with this. They can safely bike to the many pools in this vicinity to go with friends. They go to the shopping center together and the lake.

What I don't get is that these Sangster kids do not go to elementary school with their neighborhood friends (besides the AAP kids). They do not go to the same ES as their walkable community, which nobody complains about, but then it's a big problem for MS and HS?

I am confused by this too…. The parent who went on and on at the very end about how the Huntsman kids are prepped for the split with the rest of the Sangster friends (they tell their kids, you’ll just have to make new friends)…don’t they realize how that sounds? I get the kids who are already in Irving…I think they should get to stay with their cohort. But the kids still at Sangster? It doesn’t make sense (and I’m literally right down the street and have plenty of school friends on the other side of 286…it’s fine! We drive the 2 minutes to visit).

I agree.

That argument makes absolutely zero sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we think Reid will revert to scenario 3 for south of the Parkway to be moved out of WSHS ?

Yes.

But not until map 7 woth the school board final map vote.

So create this same problem for HV families to avoid it for sangster families?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don’t understand the nuance of these neighborhoods don’t see the community both White oaks and Sangster parents are fighting for. A man with a house on the dividing line made it clear - his neighborhood is walkable for students to visit friends etc but moving him to LBSS makes most of his school. community across the parkway and Lee chapel, eliminating the community aspect. white oaks parents explained that their neighborhood is governed by 3 HOAS that would be split in strange ways, again eliminating the neighborhood community when the students go to different schools.

When these parents talk about community, it’s not the school it’s where their physical house is and the community they see daily, carpool with, walk to friends houses etc. but moving these schools they would no longer be part of that because the natural boundaries are the parkway - and kids aren’t crossing that alone to go play w a friend

I didn't understand that argument. There are no houses in that Sangster area that they're suggested moving in Scenario 4 where the dividing line is between houses. There's a house on Cottontail that's divided from its neighbors down the street in that scenario via Cherry Run Park. But the county usually uses natural boundaries like parks, woods and streams as dividing lines. The argument here is that kids would be able to play with their neighbors, but not other kids who go to their school because they couldn't walk to see them? Isn't that always the case, especially when it comes to middle and high schools? Are kids in that Sangster neighborhood walking up Keene Mill to hang out with their classmates from Daventry at the Plaza?

I understand that no one wants to leave their current school. I wish the county would look at less disruptive options, like their faulty CIP projections, why the number of transfers into "closed to transfers" WSHS has more than doubled in the past few years and residency checks. But FCPS isn't interested in doing any of that.

There’s not a park on cottontail. There is a swath of natural woods, but it’s not a significant space.

Kids from Sangster are walking up and down huntsman and Sydenstricker with their OHES and HVES base peers, some who actually went to Sangster with them in AAP. I’m unsure what Daventry has to do with this. They can safely bike to the many pools in this vicinity to go with friends. They go to the shopping center together and the lake.

What I don't get is that these Sangster kids do not go to elementary school with their neighborhood friends (besides the AAP kids). They do not go to the same ES as their walkable community, which nobody complains about, but then it's a big problem for MS and HS?

I am confused by this too…. The parent who went on and on at the very end about how the Huntsman kids are prepped for the split with the rest of the Sangster friends (they tell their kids, you’ll just have to make new friends)…don’t they realize how that sounds? I get the kids who are already in Irving…I think they should get to stay with their cohort. But the kids still at Sangster? It doesn’t make sense (and I’m literally right down the street and have plenty of school friends on the other side of 286…it’s fine! We drive the 2 minutes to visit).

I am very curious how the rest of Sangster feels about this part of their argument. Person after person said their kids community and friends are not the 80% of Sangster that goes to LBSS, but the kids over at Irving and WSHS, who 95% of them attend other elementary schools, have never met the people from that Sangster neighborhood, and don't live near that neighborhood.

I am not talking about the Irving Sangster kids. They should be grandfathered into WSHS, at least the 8th graders

I am talking about the parents of young elementary kids who are saying the majority of their Sangster classmates are not their community and that the kids from WSES, KME, CFE, RVE, OHE and HVE that they have never met are their real community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do we think Reid will revert to scenario 3 for south of the Parkway to be moved out of WSHS ?

Yes.

But not until map 7 woth the school board final map vote.

So create this same problem for HV families to avoid it for sangster families?

Yes, except HV will turn into a split feeder. Or part of it will be entirely rezoned for all 3 schools, completely outside of their school bounds, where no one from their school attends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don’t understand the nuance of these neighborhoods don’t see the community both White oaks and Sangster parents are fighting for. A man with a house on the dividing line made it clear - his neighborhood is walkable for students to visit friends etc but moving him to LBSS makes most of his school. community across the parkway and Lee chapel, eliminating the community aspect. white oaks parents explained that their neighborhood is governed by 3 HOAS that would be split in strange ways, again eliminating the neighborhood community when the students go to different schools.

When these parents talk about community, it’s not the school it’s where their physical house is and the community they see daily, carpool with, walk to friends houses etc. but moving these schools they would no longer be part of that because the natural boundaries are the parkway - and kids aren’t crossing that alone to go play w a friend

I didn't understand that argument. There are no houses in that Sangster area that they're suggested moving in Scenario 4 where the dividing line is between houses. There's a house on Cottontail that's divided from its neighbors down the street in that scenario via Cherry Run Park. But the county usually uses natural boundaries like parks, woods and streams as dividing lines. The argument here is that kids would be able to play with their neighbors, but not other kids who go to their school because they couldn't walk to see them? Isn't that always the case, especially when it comes to middle and high schools? Are kids in that Sangster neighborhood walking up Keene Mill to hang out with their classmates from Daventry at the Plaza?

I understand that no one wants to leave their current school. I wish the county would look at less disruptive options, like their faulty CIP projections, why the number of transfers into "closed to transfers" WSHS has more than doubled in the past few years and residency checks. But FCPS isn't interested in doing any of that.

There’s not a park on cottontail. There is a swath of natural woods, but it’s not a significant space.

Kids from Sangster are walking up and down huntsman and Sydenstricker with their OHES and HVES base peers, some who actually went to Sangster with them in AAP. I’m unsure what Daventry has to do with this. They can safely bike to the many pools in this vicinity to go with friends. They go to the shopping center together and the lake.

What I don't get is that these Sangster kids do not go to elementary school with their neighborhood friends (besides the AAP kids). They do not go to the same ES as their walkable community, which nobody complains about, but then it's a big problem for MS and HS?

I am confused by this too…. The parent who went on and on at the very end about how the Huntsman kids are prepped for the split with the rest of the Sangster friends (they tell their kids, you’ll just have to make new friends)…don’t they realize how that sounds? I get the kids who are already in Irving…I think they should get to stay with their cohort. But the kids still at Sangster? It doesn’t make sense (and I’m literally right down the street and have plenty of school friends on the other side of 286…it’s fine! We drive the 2 minutes to visit).

I am very curious how the rest of Sangster feels about this part of their argument. Person after person said their kids community and friends are not the 80% of Sangster that goes to LBSS, but the kids over at Irving and WSHS, who 95% of them attend other elementary schools, have never met the people from that Sangster neighborhood, and don't live near that neighborhood.

I am not talking about the Irving Sangster kids. They should be grandfathered into WSHS, at least the 8th graders

I am talking about the parents of young elementary kids who are saying the majority of their Sangster classmates are not their community and that the kids from WSES, KME, CFE, RVE, OHE and HVE that they have never met are their real community.

Yeah, very odd.
I don't understand it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don’t understand the nuance of these neighborhoods don’t see the community both White oaks and Sangster parents are fighting for. A man with a house on the dividing line made it clear - his neighborhood is walkable for students to visit friends etc but moving him to LBSS makes most of his school. community across the parkway and Lee chapel, eliminating the community aspect. white oaks parents explained that their neighborhood is governed by 3 HOAS that would be split in strange ways, again eliminating the neighborhood community when the students go to different schools.

When these parents talk about community, it’s not the school it’s where their physical house is and the community they see daily, carpool with, walk to friends houses etc. but moving these schools they would no longer be part of that because the natural boundaries are the parkway - and kids aren’t crossing that alone to go play w a friend

I didn't understand that argument. There are no houses in that Sangster area that they're suggested moving in Scenario 4 where the dividing line is between houses. There's a house on Cottontail that's divided from its neighbors down the street in that scenario via Cherry Run Park. But the county usually uses natural boundaries like parks, woods and streams as dividing lines. The argument here is that kids would be able to play with their neighbors, but not other kids who go to their school because they couldn't walk to see them? Isn't that always the case, especially when it comes to middle and high schools? Are kids in that Sangster neighborhood walking up Keene Mill to hang out with their classmates from Daventry at the Plaza?

I understand that no one wants to leave their current school. I wish the county would look at less disruptive options, like their faulty CIP projections, why the number of transfers into "closed to transfers" WSHS has more than doubled in the past few years and residency checks. But FCPS isn't interested in doing any of that.

There’s not a park on cottontail. There is a swath of natural woods, but it’s not a significant space.

Kids from Sangster are walking up and down huntsman and Sydenstricker with their OHES and HVES base peers, some who actually went to Sangster with them in AAP. I’m unsure what Daventry has to do with this. They can safely bike to the many pools in this vicinity to go with friends. They go to the shopping center together and the lake.

What I don't get is that these Sangster kids do not go to elementary school with their neighborhood friends (besides the AAP kids). They do not go to the same ES as their walkable community, which nobody complains about, but then it's a big problem for MS and HS?

I am confused by this too…. The parent who went on and on at the very end about how the Huntsman kids are prepped for the split with the rest of the Sangster friends (they tell their kids, you’ll just have to make new friends)…don’t they realize how that sounds? I get the kids who are already in Irving…I think they should get to stay with their cohort. But the kids still at Sangster? It doesn’t make sense (and I’m literally right down the street and have plenty of school friends on the other side of 286…it’s fine! We drive the 2 minutes to visit).

I am very curious how the rest of Sangster feels about this part of their argument. Person after person said their kids community and friends are not the 80% of Sangster that goes to LBSS, but the kids over at Irving and WSHS, who 95% of them attend other elementary schools, have never met the people from that Sangster neighborhood, and don't live near that neighborhood.

I am not talking about the Irving Sangster kids. They should be grandfathered into WSHS, at least the 8th graders

I am talking about the parents of young elementary kids who are saying the majority of their Sangster classmates are not their community and that the kids from WSES, KME, CFE, RVE, OHE and HVE that they have never met are their real community.

Yeah, very odd.
I don't understand it.

Didn't they say they sought out sports teams in WSHS area and that's why those kids are their community because they've been on teams and in activities with them for years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s the beef that Sangster parents have with LBSS? It’s comparable to WSHS in most ways.

From the meeting:

The LB high school students on the bus. They picked their houses specifically to avoid riding busses with high school students.

Their community is not the Sangster students they attend school with. Their community is the kids from the other WSHS elementary schools that they don't yet know who will be attending Irving and WSHS.

If rezoned, their HOA will feed into 2 middle and high schools (That neighborhood already feeds into 2 elementary schools, 2 middle schools and 2 high schools, but the one West Orange Hunt HOA only feeds into WSHS according to the parents in attendance.)

Even though 1/2 of WSHS votes for 2 school board reps from other magesterial districts (Braddock and Franconia) and Irving sits in the Braddock magesterial district, not the Springfield magesterial district, the Sangster neighborhood votes for the Springfield magesterial district. They expressed that getting moved to LBSS means that they lose their school board representation, because they do not vote for the Braddock rep. I think this one is just a basic misunderstanding of civics and Fairfax County governance, since I believe the only FCPS high school that is represented by only 1 dedicated rep is Fairfax HS. All of the others, including WSHS and LBSS, are represented by at least 2 or 3 school board reps due to jacked up gerrymandering by the Board of Supervisors. The school board representation is a non argument based on county governance structure.


The good points they made:

They specifically purchased their houses knowing the neighborhood was a split feeder, because they specifically wanted to attend Sangster > Irving > WSHS, not LBSS because of the 4 reasons above (high school kids on the busses, the community claim, school board reps, and HOA argument) Rezoning removes their choice.


The best points and most compelling arguments from the Sangster community were made by the 4 Irving students who spoke about grandfathering, the inequity of letting secondary 7th and 8th graders be grandfathered but not allowing the same grandfathering for middle school students, and the biggest point was that the final maps will be released at least a month after 8th students register for classes and audition for classes like orchestra, so those Irving 8th graders will be sitting in limbo for weeks or months, not able to register for high school classes and not knowing what high school they will attend. Bravo to those 4 students for making such strong arguments for yourselves. I am sure your parents are on this forum to pass this on. You should be very proud.


The White Oaks to Cherry Run families were asking that grandfathering be given for entire families through preschool younger siblings, so families don't have to have kids at 2 elementary schools.

In my opinion, that was one of the weakest arguments of the night against rezoning and the weakest grandfathering argument.

One, because of the scope of grandfathering county wide to grandfather all current and future elementary kids with currently enrolled siblings is just too large and encompasses too many years, more years than the entire rezoning cycle.

And two, we all all know that having kids at 2 elementary schools is something FCPS families jump on without a seconds pause when one kid gets into the AAP center programs.

The grandfathering of entire families though 7 years of elementary schools was not a viable request in my opinion.

Others might have viewed my assessment differently, but this was my take on the meeting.

Your second point on White Oaks doesn't stand because affected families bought into an elementary school that is a center, so they were never going to have kids at two schools if the older ones get into AAP.

This is not our school, but few more arguments I picked were different start times and lack of SACC continuity.

Maybe they can give the neighboring SACCs an out of bounds (OOB) stop on one of the bus runs? My kids are zoned for HV, but go to Sangster for AAP. They kept their HV SACC spots. We drop them at HV in the morning, and a Sangster OOB bus stops to pick them up. There are several kids who do the same. The bus returns in the afternoon, and we pick them up from HV. Less driving for us and we didn't have to get back on the waitlist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don’t understand the nuance of these neighborhoods don’t see the community both White oaks and Sangster parents are fighting for. A man with a house on the dividing line made it clear - his neighborhood is walkable for students to visit friends etc but moving him to LBSS makes most of his school. community across the parkway and Lee chapel, eliminating the community aspect. white oaks parents explained that their neighborhood is governed by 3 HOAS that would be split in strange ways, again eliminating the neighborhood community when the students go to different schools.

When these parents talk about community, it’s not the school it’s where their physical house is and the community they see daily, carpool with, walk to friends houses etc. but moving these schools they would no longer be part of that because the natural boundaries are the parkway - and kids aren’t crossing that alone to go play w a friend

I didn't understand that argument. There are no houses in that Sangster area that they're suggested moving in Scenario 4 where the dividing line is between houses. There's a house on Cottontail that's divided from its neighbors down the street in that scenario via Cherry Run Park. But the county usually uses natural boundaries like parks, woods and streams as dividing lines. The argument here is that kids would be able to play with their neighbors, but not other kids who go to their school because they couldn't walk to see them? Isn't that always the case, especially when it comes to middle and high schools? Are kids in that Sangster neighborhood walking up Keene Mill to hang out with their classmates from Daventry at the Plaza?

I understand that no one wants to leave their current school. I wish the county would look at less disruptive options, like their faulty CIP projections, why the number of transfers into "closed to transfers" WSHS has more than doubled in the past few years and residency checks. But FCPS isn't interested in doing any of that.

There’s not a park on cottontail. There is a swath of natural woods, but it’s not a significant space.

Kids from Sangster are walking up and down huntsman and Sydenstricker with their OHES and HVES base peers, some who actually went to Sangster with them in AAP. I’m unsure what Daventry has to do with this. They can safely bike to the many pools in this vicinity to go with friends. They go to the shopping center together and the lake.

What I don't get is that these Sangster kids do not go to elementary school with their neighborhood friends (besides the AAP kids). They do not go to the same ES as their walkable community, which nobody complains about, but then it's a big problem for MS and HS?

I am confused by this too…. The parent who went on and on at the very end about how the Huntsman kids are prepped for the split with the rest of the Sangster friends (they tell their kids, you’ll just have to make new friends)…don’t they realize how that sounds? I get the kids who are already in Irving…I think they should get to stay with their cohort. But the kids still at Sangster? It doesn’t make sense (and I’m literally right down the street and have plenty of school friends on the other side of 286…it’s fine! We drive the 2 minutes to visit).

I am very curious how the rest of Sangster feels about this part of their argument. Person after person said their kids community and friends are not the 80% of Sangster that goes to LBSS, but the kids over at Irving and WSHS, who 95% of them attend other elementary schools, have never met the people from that Sangster neighborhood, and don't live near that neighborhood.

I am not talking about the Irving Sangster kids. They should be grandfathered into WSHS, at least the 8th graders

I am talking about the parents of young elementary kids who are saying the majority of their Sangster classmates are not their community and that the kids from WSES, KME, CFE, RVE, OHE and HVE that they have never met are their real community.

Yeah, very odd.
I don't understand it.

Didn't they say they sought out sports teams in WSHS area and that's why those kids are their community because they've been on teams and in activities with them for years?

Even if they are on only West Springfield Little League, SYC, St. Bernadettes Summer Theater Program, Mount Vernon Theater, swim teams, etc. They still have regular old LB kids on their teams. It is not as if doing a league with "West Springfield" in the title removes them from the Lake Braddock Community. The communities overlap and are just as full of Lake Braddock zoned Sangster kids as WSHS zoned Sangster kids. If Sangster has any divide, it is AAP and non AAP classes, not WSHS kids vs Lake Braddock kids. That is not a thing there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don’t understand the nuance of these neighborhoods don’t see the community both White oaks and Sangster parents are fighting for. A man with a house on the dividing line made it clear - his neighborhood is walkable for students to visit friends etc but moving him to LBSS makes most of his school. community across the parkway and Lee chapel, eliminating the community aspect. white oaks parents explained that their neighborhood is governed by 3 HOAS that would be split in strange ways, again eliminating the neighborhood community when the students go to different schools.

When these parents talk about community, it’s not the school it’s where their physical house is and the community they see daily, carpool with, walk to friends houses etc. but moving these schools they would no longer be part of that because the natural boundaries are the parkway - and kids aren’t crossing that alone to go play w a friend

I didn't understand that argument. There are no houses in that Sangster area that they're suggested moving in Scenario 4 where the dividing line is between houses. There's a house on Cottontail that's divided from its neighbors down the street in that scenario via Cherry Run Park. But the county usually uses natural boundaries like parks, woods and streams as dividing lines. The argument here is that kids would be able to play with their neighbors, but not other kids who go to their school because they couldn't walk to see them? Isn't that always the case, especially when it comes to middle and high schools? Are kids in that Sangster neighborhood walking up Keene Mill to hang out with their classmates from Daventry at the Plaza?

I understand that no one wants to leave their current school. I wish the county would look at less disruptive options, like their faulty CIP projections, why the number of transfers into "closed to transfers" WSHS has more than doubled in the past few years and residency checks. But FCPS isn't interested in doing any of that.

There’s not a park on cottontail. There is a swath of natural woods, but it’s not a significant space.

Kids from Sangster are walking up and down huntsman and Sydenstricker with their OHES and HVES base peers, some who actually went to Sangster with them in AAP. I’m unsure what Daventry has to do with this. They can safely bike to the many pools in this vicinity to go with friends. They go to the shopping center together and the lake.

What I don't get is that these Sangster kids do not go to elementary school with their neighborhood friends (besides the AAP kids). They do not go to the same ES as their walkable community, which nobody complains about, but then it's a big problem for MS and HS?

I am confused by this too…. The parent who went on and on at the very end about how the Huntsman kids are prepped for the split with the rest of the Sangster friends (they tell their kids, you’ll just have to make new friends)…don’t they realize how that sounds? I get the kids who are already in Irving…I think they should get to stay with their cohort. But the kids still at Sangster? It doesn’t make sense (and I’m literally right down the street and have plenty of school friends on the other side of 286…it’s fine! We drive the 2 minutes to visit).

I am very curious how the rest of Sangster feels about this part of their argument. Person after person said their kids community and friends are not the 80% of Sangster that goes to LBSS, but the kids over at Irving and WSHS, who 95% of them attend other elementary schools, have never met the people from that Sangster neighborhood, and don't live near that neighborhood.

I am not talking about the Irving Sangster kids. They should be grandfathered into WSHS, at least the 8th graders

I am talking about the parents of young elementary kids who are saying the majority of their Sangster classmates are not their community and that the kids from WSES, KME, CFE, RVE, OHE and HVE that they have never met are their real community.

Yeah, very odd.
I don't understand it.

Didn't they say they sought out sports teams in WSHS area and that's why those kids are their community because they've been on teams and in activities with them for years?

Even if they are on only West Springfield Little League, SYC, St. Bernadettes Summer Theater Program, Mount Vernon Theater, swim teams, etc. They still have regular old LB kids on their teams. It is not as if doing a league with "West Springfield" in the title removes them from the Lake Braddock Community. The communities overlap and are just as full of Lake Braddock zoned Sangster kids as WSHS zoned Sangster kids. If Sangster has any divide, it is AAP and non AAP classes, not WSHS kids vs Lake Braddock kids. That is not a thing there.

Agreed. We live in a different West Springfield neighborhood (even farther from Burke/LBSS), and my kids have done sports with WS little league, BYRC (Burke), Burke Basketball, SYC (springfield) and their travel teams have kids from all over - WS, LBSS, SoCo, Hayfield, Edison, etc.
None of these high schools is more than 15 minutes from our house and my kids have friends at all of the schools.

[Anonymous]

I attended the Chantilly meeting. Someone asked about Greenbriar East overcrowding and Reid suggested she wants to model putting 6th grade at Rocky Run.