FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think connecting the timber lane island with a bit from falls hill so it’s “connected” on map is fine if it’s needed but don’t think we need to extend to 50. My kid went to timber lane. Longfellow, and now is at McLean. We are equal distant to McLean, Marshall, and Falls church but the kids by 50 are much closer to falls church.

They are doing anything to bump capacity up at Cooper and Langley to cut FHES to Herndon.

Sending kids that border Loudoun Co. to Langley is insane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two strong observations:

Why would they send the Navy island in Franklin Farm to Oak Hill? Franklin Farm on that side of the parkway goes to Crossfield. Look at the map. There is something else going on here. These kids currently go to as does Crossfield.

Thru missed a real island--though it is tiny:
Look at the boundary map for Lee's Corner. Compare it with the Crossfield boundary map. There is a street --a cul-de-sac that is split. Some go to Crossfield and some to Lee's Corner. The students that go to Crossfield must drive through the Lee's Corner boundary in order to get to Crossfield. There are a couple of other cul-de-sacs off of the street.
If you want to see it, look at Ashvale Drive. Some of it may be be Franklin Glen instead of Franklin Farm and had the boundary line drawn before the parkway was built. That would be the Lee's Corner portion.

This could be easily missed if you are not familiar with the area.

This is why they should have had people familiar with elementary school boundaries on the committee.

I can try to speak to the bolded info, but with the caveat that I have no inside info.

Navy is an AAP center that kids from Crossfield can choose to attend. If you move Navy kids to Crossfield, you are moving them from an AAP center school to a non-center school. You end up with a weird situation where the kids eligible for AAP in third grade can choose to go (back) to Navy whereas the kids who don't qualify for AAP would not have that choice. Oak Hill is an AAP center, so all the kids in the island would be moved to Oak Hill regardless of AAP or Gen Ed, and there would not be any situation where some of them end up right back at the school they got moved from.

At least some, if not all, of Ashvale Drive is definitely Franklin Glen. Franklin Farm and Franklin Glen were built before Fairfax County Parkway was such a big road. That's why some of FF is east of the parkway and some is west, and same with FG. The developers did not envision such a large highway running through. I know it would never happen, but it seems like all the homes east of the parkway should just become part of the FF HOA and all the homes west of the parkway should be FG.

This is such a stupid AAP-Centric thing to say. 1/5 of those kids are AAP, mama. You can't move all those kids to an AAP center just because one out of every five of them may end up in AAP. So stupid.

There is a teeeeeny tiny portion of Franklin Glen that is east of Fairfax County Parkway. Really, Franklin Farm should just annex those houses like they've done for other neighborhoods, it's so awkward for the families who live there. We specifically did not buy one of those houses because we didn't want our entire neighborhood to be on the other side of a major road.

Kindly F off with your “AAP mama” BS. My children are not in AAP. It’s simply a fact that moving kids from Navy to Crossfield creates a situation where some would end up right back at Navy. Oak Hill eliminates that issue. I think the Navy to Crossfield thing would actually be unfair because then some kids would get to choose to go back to their old school whereas others wouldn’t get that choice. Getting rid of AAP centers seems like it would solve some problems all over, but I will be very surprised if they do it.

Try getting rid of the massive chip on your shoulder about your kids not being in AAP and realize we are probably in agreement here that not moving these kids at all would be the preferred action.

I think the real reason they are moving that island to Oak Hill is because Oak Hill has an AAP center. It’s a more equitable transfer - kids will still have AAP at their base.

[Anonymous]

I'm looking at the proposed new maps and wondering if the slide for Fairfax and Woodson changes is backwards?

They're showing Fairfax shrunk and Woodson's attendance area expanded (just like the previous slide for KJMS and Frost) but it says Fairfax is gaining students and Woodson losing them. It looks like it's going to make Woodson's overcapacity worse?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s revisit Franklin/Carson/Rocky Run.

If we move (1) Franklin kids who are already zoned to Chantilly to Rocky Run, (2) Carson kids zoned to SLHS (fox mill and some Floris kids) to Hughes, and (3) Crossfield kids from Carson to Franklin, will this solve the split feeder problem?

This makes no sense. The Franklin kids that go to Chantilly are from Oak Hill and Lees Corner. Some of the Oak Hill kids are walkers to Franklin. I think some of the Lees Corner kids may be, as well. Franklin is on the dividing line of Oak Hill and Lees Corner.

It would make more sense to send the Navy/Waples Mill kids to Carson.

Why not swap the Oakton zoned kids from Carson to Franklin with the Chantilly zoned kids from Franklin to Carson? That would eliminate two split feeders. While we're at it, let's eliminate AAP centers in middle schools so the Navy mamas don't complain about losing that.

1. Franklin Middle School is in the Chantilly boundary between two Chantilly elementary school boundaries (Oak Hill and Lee's Corner). Some of those students are walkers.
2. Sending the Oakton kids to Carson makes far more sense.
3. The only Chantilly boundary kids currently at Carson are AAP.

I would suggest sending the AAP kids back to their base school along with this. There are well enough Chantilly boundary kids in the AAP center at Carson to justify this.

Ah, I think I was confused then, and it should have been the other way around. Basically, eliminate the AAP Center at Carson, it is totally unnecessary since Franklin has AAP classes. It's not like ES where the school has to pull in non-AAP kids, Franklin has DEDICATED AAP classes. I don't understand why there are Navy kids there.

You're correct. Franklin has had dedicated AAP classes for at least 12 years, and their program, at least when two of my kids were in it, was very strong. There is no reason not to move all the Franklin kids back to Franklin.

Franklin stated they clustered the AAP kids in classes, but it didn’t appear they actually have dedicated classes to AAP. They are not called AAP classes and it’s not clear if it included kids who aren’t in AAP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think connecting the timber lane island with a bit from falls hill so it’s “connected” on map is fine if it’s needed but don’t think we need to extend to 50. My kid went to timber lane. Longfellow, and now is at McLean. We are equal distant to McLean, Marshall, and Falls church but the kids by 50 are much closer to falls church.

They are doing anything to bump capacity up at Cooper and Langley to cut FHES to Herndon.

Moving the Tysons attendance island for Longfellow/McLean to Cooper/Langley wouldn't by itself leave Cooper or Langley so overcrowded that they would need to move kids to Herndon schools. If they propose that later, it will be for other reasons.

The area in question is already a split feeder to Spring Hill ES, and most Spring Hill kids go to Cooper/Langley. If it were moved to Cooper/Langley, there wouldn't be an attendance island any longer, as the area is contiguous to the existing Cooper/Langley boundaries. The only issue is that the kids in question do live somewhat closer to McLean than to Langley, although they live closer to Langley than the kids in the Forestville area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm looking at the proposed new maps and wondering if the slide for Fairfax and Woodson changes is backwards?

They're showing Fairfax shrunk and Woodson's attendance area expanded (just like the previous slide for KJMS and Frost) but it says Fairfax is gaining students and Woodson losing them. It looks like it's going to make Woodson's overcapacity worse?

They are not simply expanded or shrunk, just changed. Woodson's is extending further west to include the southern part of Willow Springs ES, whereas Fairfax is picking up areas north of 29 zoned to Woodson. I assume the areas north of 29 have more students than the far western areas and the numbers are accurate.

Of course, it doesn't make sense for either of those areas to attend Woodson; Fairfax or Centreville are closer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm looking at the proposed new maps and wondering if the slide for Fairfax and Woodson changes is backwards?

They're showing Fairfax shrunk and Woodson's attendance area expanded (just like the previous slide for KJMS and Frost) but it says Fairfax is gaining students and Woodson losing them. It looks like it's going to make Woodson's overcapacity worse?

The presentation is sloppy and unclear as to the net effect of dealing with both the Willow Springs attendance island and the Johnson/Fairfax island on Frost/Woodson and Johnson/Fairfax.

If they showed these materials to the BRAC on 4/11 and expected meaningful feedback in the same session, they are fooling themselves. So much of it "looks good" at first, especially if you aren't that familiar with the areas.

Equally perplexing are the apparent suggestions that they should solve the Flint Hill ES attendance island by creating a prettier map that would require students to travel through the attendance area of Oakton ES to get to Flint Hill and that they should require kids living right off Route 50 to travel all the way to Longfellow MS when Jackson MS is much closer, has fewer students, and is the main feeder to the HS (Falls Church) these kids would attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think connecting the timber lane island with a bit from falls hill so it’s “connected” on map is fine if it’s needed but don’t think we need to extend to 50. My kid went to timber lane. Longfellow, and now is at McLean. We are equal distant to McLean, Marshall, and Falls church but the kids by 50 are much closer to falls church.

They are doing anything to bump capacity up at Cooper and Langley to cut FHES to Herndon.

Sending kids that border Loudoun Co. to Langley is insane.

As insane as sending kids near 50 to McLean? because I looked and it adds the exact same amount of time to their commute.

Like it or not, the difference to HMS is within a couple minutes commute of Cooper and less than ten to HHS vs Langley.

Your equity obsession is showing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm looking at the proposed new maps and wondering if the slide for Fairfax and Woodson changes is backwards?

They're showing Fairfax shrunk and Woodson's attendance area expanded (just like the previous slide for KJMS and Frost) but it says Fairfax is gaining students and Woodson losing them. It looks like it's going to make Woodson's overcapacity worse?

They are not simply expanded or shrunk, just changed. Woodson's is extending further west to include the southern part of Willow Springs ES, whereas Fairfax is picking up areas north of 29 zoned to Woodson. I assume the areas north of 29 have more students than the far western areas and the numbers are accurate.

Of course, it doesn't make sense for either of those areas to attend Woodson; Fairfax or Centreville are closer.

The presentation is still confusing even if you're right that the smaller area that would potentially be moved to Johnson/Fairfax has more kids than the larger area that would potentially move to Frost/Woodson. Slide 25 says fixing the attendance island would add kids to Frost and remove kids from Jackson, but Slide 26 says it would remove kids from Woodson and add kids to Fairfax. That seems odd since Frost feeds to Woodson and Jackson to Fairfax.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think connecting the timber lane island with a bit from falls hill so it’s “connected” on map is fine if it’s needed but don’t think we need to extend to 50. My kid went to timber lane. Longfellow, and now is at McLean. We are equal distant to McLean, Marshall, and Falls church but the kids by 50 are much closer to falls church.

They are doing anything to bump capacity up at Cooper and Langley to cut FHES to Herndon.

Sending kids that border Loudoun Co. to Langley is insane.

As insane as sending kids near 50 to McLean? because I looked and it adds the exact same amount of time to their commute.

Like it or not, the difference to HMS is within a couple minutes commute of Cooper and less than ten to HHS vs Langley.

Your equity obsession is showing.

They aren't proposing (yet) to send kids near Route 50 to McLean, just to Longfellow. They would leave these kids at Falls Church. Of course, that's even more bizarre, since about 95% of Longfellow goes to McLean. I guess they left them at Falls Church because they didn't want to add kids to overcrowded McLean, and maybe they even realized Falls Church is getting expanded, but all that should have also suggested leaving these kids at Jackson and maintaining the fairly even split feeder at Timber Lane.

[Anonymous]

I’m sure every UMC parent who wants their kids to stay in their current district is evaluating or will evaluate rental opportunities in their chosen pyramid.

The catch 22 is that the push to have low income areas in each pyramid will allow these parents to rent a $2,000 or less apartment and keep their kids in their current school.

It’ll be so easy. And if you think otherwise, I have a hayfield bridge to sell you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think connecting the timber lane island with a bit from falls hill so it’s “connected” on map is fine if it’s needed but don’t think we need to extend to 50. My kid went to timber lane. Longfellow, and now is at McLean. We are equal distant to McLean, Marshall, and Falls church but the kids by 50 are much closer to falls church.

They are doing anything to bump capacity up at Cooper and Langley to cut FHES to Herndon.

Sending kids that border Loudoun Co. to Langley is insane.

As insane as sending kids near 50 to McLean? because I looked and it adds the exact same amount of time to their commute.

Like it or not, the difference to HMS is within a couple minutes commute of Cooper and less than ten to HHS vs Langley.

Your equity obsession is showing.

They aren't proposing (yet) to send kids near Route 50 to McLean, just to Longfellow. They would leave these kids at Falls Church. Of course, that's even more bizarre, since about 95% of Longfellow goes to McLean. I guess they left them at Falls Church because they didn't want to add kids to overcrowded McLean, and maybe they even realized Falls Church is getting expanded, but all that should have also suggested leaving these kids at Jackson and maintaining the fairly even split feeder at Timber Lane.

^ By the way, I'm a DP than the poster to whom you were originally responding. I don't care if they leave Forestville kids at Langley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think connecting the timber lane island with a bit from falls hill so it’s “connected” on map is fine if it’s needed but don’t think we need to extend to 50. My kid went to timber lane. Longfellow, and now is at McLean. We are equal distant to McLean, Marshall, and Falls church but the kids by 50 are much closer to falls church.

They are doing anything to bump capacity up at Cooper and Langley to cut FHES to Herndon.

Sending kids that border Loudoun Co. to Langley is insane.

As insane as sending kids near 50 to McLean? because I looked and it adds the exact same amount of time to their commute.

Like it or not, the difference to HMS is within a couple minutes commute of Cooper and less than ten to HHS vs Langley.

Your equity obsession is showing.

They aren't proposing (yet) to send kids near Route 50 to McLean, just to Longfellow. They would leave these kids at Falls Church. Of course, that's even more bizarre, since about 95% of Longfellow goes to McLean. I guess they left them at Falls Church because they didn't want to add kids to overcrowded McLean, and maybe they even realized Falls Church is getting expanded, but all that should have also suggested leaving these kids at Jackson and maintaining the fairly even split feeder at Timber Lane.

Same analysis holds for Longfellow. The person who thinks it’s insane to send great falls to Langley surely feels the same about busing these poor kids to Longfellow, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think connecting the timber lane island with a bit from falls hill so it’s “connected” on map is fine if it’s needed but don’t think we need to extend to 50. My kid went to timber lane. Longfellow, and now is at McLean. We are equal distant to McLean, Marshall, and Falls church but the kids by 50 are much closer to falls church.

They are doing anything to bump capacity up at Cooper and Langley to cut FHES to Herndon.

Sending kids that border Loudoun Co. to Langley is insane.

As insane as sending kids near 50 to McLean? because I looked and it adds the exact same amount of time to their commute.

Like it or not, the difference to HMS is within a couple minutes commute of Cooper and less than ten to HHS vs Langley.

Your equity obsession is showing.

They aren't proposing (yet) to send kids near Route 50 to McLean, just to Longfellow. They would leave these kids at Falls Church. Of course, that's even more bizarre, since about 95% of Longfellow goes to McLean. I guess they left them at Falls Church because they didn't want to add kids to overcrowded McLean, and maybe they even realized Falls Church is getting expanded, but all that should have also suggested leaving these kids at Jackson and maintaining the fairly even split feeder at Timber Lane.

Same analysis holds for Longfellow. The person who thinks it’s insane to send great falls to Langley surely feels the same about busing these poor kids to Longfellow, right?

I'll let that poster respond. May have been a "hit and run" post where a poster just wanted to stir up the Langley folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Two strong observations:

Why would they send the Navy island in Franklin Farm to Oak Hill? Franklin Farm on that side of the parkway goes to Crossfield. Look at the map. There is something else going on here. These kids currently go to as does Crossfield.

Thru missed a real island--though it is tiny:
Look at the boundary map for Lee's Corner. Compare it with the Crossfield boundary map. There is a street --a cul-de-sac that is split. Some go to Crossfield and some to Lee's Corner. The students that go to Crossfield must drive through the Lee's Corner boundary in order to get to Crossfield. There are a couple of other cul-de-sacs off of the street.
If you want to see it, look at Ashvale Drive. Some of it may be be Franklin Glen instead of Franklin Farm and had the boundary line drawn before the parkway was built. That would be the Lee's Corner portion.

This could be easily missed if you are not familiar with the area.

This is why they should have had people familiar with elementary school boundaries on the committee.

I can try to speak to the bolded info, but with the caveat that I have no inside info.

Navy is an AAP center that kids from Crossfield can choose to attend. If you move Navy kids to Crossfield, you are moving them from an AAP center school to a non-center school. You end up with a weird situation where the kids eligible for AAP in third grade can choose to go (back) to Navy whereas the kids who don't qualify for AAP would not have that choice. Oak Hill is an AAP center, so all the kids in the island would be moved to Oak Hill regardless of AAP or Gen Ed, and there would not be any situation where some of them end up right back at the school they got moved from.

At least some, if not all, of Ashvale Drive is definitely Franklin Glen. Franklin Farm and Franklin Glen were built before Fairfax County Parkway was such a big road. That's why some of FF is east of the parkway and some is west, and same with FG. The developers did not envision such a large highway running through. I know it would never happen, but it seems like all the homes east of the parkway should just become part of the FF HOA and all the homes west of the parkway should be FG.

This is such a stupid AAP-Centric thing to say. 1/5 of those kids are AAP, mama. You can't move all those kids to an AAP center just because one out of every five of them may end up in AAP. So stupid.

There is a teeeeeny tiny portion of Franklin Glen that is east of Fairfax County Parkway. Really, Franklin Farm should just annex those houses like they've done for other neighborhoods, it's so awkward for the families who live there. We specifically did not buy one of those houses because we didn't want our entire neighborhood to be on the other side of a major road.

Kindly F off with your “AAP mama” BS. My children are not in AAP. It’s simply a fact that moving kids from Navy to Crossfield creates a situation where some would end up right back at Navy. Oak Hill eliminates that issue. I think the Navy to Crossfield thing would actually be unfair because then some kids would get to choose to go back to their old school whereas others wouldn’t get that choice. Getting rid of AAP centers seems like it would solve some problems all over, but I will be very surprised if they do it.

Try getting rid of the massive chip on your shoulder about your kids not being in AAP and realize we are probably in agreement here that not moving these kids at all would be the preferred action.

I think the real reason they are moving that island to Oak Hill is because Oak Hill has an AAP center. It’s a more equitable transfer - kids will still have AAP at their base.

Not either of last two PP's.

Do you really think that a group who does not want to grandfather kids currently in a high school cares about that?

No, I'm not sure what this is, but this casts a far wider net. The question has been on here for years as to why a small portion of Franklin Farm goes to Navy. I think it goes back to the early history of Crossfield which was likely overcrowded by that time. However, that no longer stands as an excuse.

Look at the map. There is no reason to send these kids to Oak Hill and not Crossfield --unless it is part of the overall plan which will come later. This neighborhood is within Franklin Farm--it is not an isolated island of Franklin Farm. They are part of the Franklin Farm community on that side of 286. It makes no sense. And, as a prior poster says (as a negative), it would allow the AAP kids to stay in the same center. Why is that a bad thing?