Boundaries assessment update 2023

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Hunt Valley/Orange Hunt/WSHS thing would be easy. 1) cut off HV south of the parkway and send those kids to Newington Forest. That gets them out of the WSHS pyramid entirely since Newington Forest goes to South County. Which is probably about the same distance as WSHS for those kids.

2) change overcrowded OH boundaries to send some kids to now under capacity HV. The schools are physically quite close to one another so you have plenty of options. Also in that area, a not insignificant number of families would elect to stay at OH for the German immersion program so you could likely pick up a larger section of OH’s current boundaries than you might think.

3) if possible, fix the Rolling Valley split feeder and send all the kids to Irving/WSHS if there is still capacity at WSHS.

Now OH and HV aren’t bursting at the seams and we’ve even done a little to fix overenrollment at WSHS. And no one is getting bussed down the parkway to the other side of 95 to do it.

We're at RVES (Irving and WSHS) and it really stinks that Rolling Valley is a split feeder, because most years it's only about 10% of the class that goes to Key/Lee. I wish they would change it either way - either have those kids go to Irving/WSHS or change them to a different elementary school, like Saratoga, with more student who go to Key/Lee. But those few kids aren't really going to make a difference at either school.

How about fixing the Rolling Valley split feeder by sending the RV (split) students to Saratoga? They already go to Key and Lewis. Those split students will ride a bus to elementary school regardless if they are at RV or Saratoga. And Saratoga is close and has plenty of room. You can fix it at the lower level instead of the higher level.

Rolling valley inside the parkway should stay at WSHS.

They are within walking distance of WSHS.

They are the 2nd closet elementary after Cardinal Forest to WSHS.

No rezoning should involve moving any houses from walkable to a bus ride.

None of the kids zoned to RV, Key, and Lewis are within walking distance of West Springfield HS. At least not a practical day after day walk. That is the very south end of the RV boundary. Many probably don't even walk to RV. Sure, you could walk to WSHS, but no parent is going to let that happen every day.

I don't actually expect the county to rezone those kids to Saratoga, just pointing out there is another way to close the split feeder.

I wouldn't be surprised if they do close the split feeder by moving those RV kids to WSHS. And further reducing the catchment area for Lewis. Why would they stop screwing Lewis now?

All of the people zoned for Rolling Valley elementary between OKM and Rolling Rd inside the parkway can walk to WSHS. The Rolling Valley neighborhood is very close to WSHS.

Wait are you saying crossing OKM at rolling road on FOOT is a viable path to school? Ha!

Yes.

There are sidewalks and a crosswalk with a stoplight.

Plus the kids zoned for Rolling Valley along Rolling Road can walk to WSHS without ever crossing Rolling Road.

After Cardinal Forest, RV and WS neighborhoods along Rolling are the closest and most walkable to WSHS.

High school kids walk that all the time. Have you ever even been to that area? You sound very unfamiliar with it, like you are just basing your arguments on google maps and no experience with the actual neighborhoods feeding into WSHS.

HA! No I don’t, I sound more familiar with that intersection than you do.
Nope, wouldn’t want my kids walking across OKM/rolling road intersection. You aren’t talking about a few kids here and there. We are talking about a bunch of kids walking home from WSHS at the same time crossing OKM while other kids are driving home from WSHS. That intersection is a mess anyway and they decided not to add bike lanes when they redid the intersection.
I would much rather my kid cross rolling road than OKM. Hope you make your kids walk to get you your duck donut and Whole Foods order daily!

Kids walk across that intersection every day going to and from school. Big groups of kids.

You obviously have not been in that area when WSHS and Irving get out for the day.

Yes but do they walk most of the way down Rolling to the neighborhoods closer to the parkway? I agree lots of kids use the busy intersection at Rolling and Old Keene every day but I don’t see a significant number of kids walking down Rolling past, maybe, Greeley at most.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m surprised to hear that about LB. It’s a big school but never seemed over-crowded to me. Not sure what the solution is, as WSHS is always bordering on overenrolled, and Robinson is also big but not necessarily crowded. A few neighborhoods could maybe be cut loose to South County but I suspect the bus rides would be long, and that area of the county is seeing some building and development, so the new development combined with absorbing some of LB’s students could make for a situation where you just move the crowding from one building to another.

Lake Braddock isn’t overcrowded (it’s projected to be at 94% in 2027-28, excluding modulars) and if it were adding AAP to Robinson would take care of it overnight.

Both Robinson and Lake Braddock have huge physical plants and relative to other schools are not overcrowded.

It only gets mentioned to obscure the fact that there are other schools with far less capacity and more acute overcrowding that have been ignored for years. If they make the problem bigger, it becomes an excuse for their neglect.

Very true. We have McLean falling apart and in trailers and West Potomac the size of a small city but no one wants to have a serious conversation about those.

You joke, but Lake Braddock SS alone is about 80% the population of the entire Lewis pyramid (4400 kids at LBSS versus 5500 in the Lewis pyramid). No wonder transportation struggles to meet such wide differences in needs, more specifically why one side can't understand the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Towards the end of last night's meeting boundaries came up again as they discussed "right-sizing" schools that are overcrowded. Specifically mentioned Glasgow, LBSS, and Chantilly.

In Megan's words, "when we recognize there is overcrowding, the use of modulars is not a reason that we're fine and meanwhile we've got capacity in surrounding schools." But in the end they put the ball in Dr. Reid's court.

They are mostly lame ducks just making noise now.

Ricardy Anderson is making a big stink about Glasgow because any time there is a boundary study elsewhere in the county she demands a boundary study in Mason. It was built to be a big school. But they can move AAP kids back to Holmes and Poe if they want - no doubt it’s a chaotic school.

Lake Braddock was by design built to be big. In percentage terms it’s not especially overcrowded.

Chantilly is a different situation, and they’ve neglected the overcrowding there for many years. Maybe the negligence of SB members like Pekarsky stands out less if they lump Chantilly together with other schools like Glasgow and LB.

Once more, Chantilly parents are not complaining. The boundary is compact. Little new construction.

Since Chantilly parents say they aren’t complaining (that is, they don’t want to be moved to a less affluent school or one further away), let’s take them at their word. We can spend money elsewhere and relocate more trailers to Chantilly, if needed. There may be little new construction there but they’ll get more kids since fewer Rocky Run and Carson kids are getting into TJ.

Reminder: the formerly Chantilly neighborhoods that were redistricted to Oakton--a much more affluent school--had many, many unhappy parents.

And, FWIW, any student moved out of Chantilly would have to be assigned to a school that is further away. Why do you want to imply it is about a "less affluent" school? Just which "less affluent school" do you think they would be sent to?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Towards the end of last night's meeting boundaries came up again as they discussed "right-sizing" schools that are overcrowded. Specifically mentioned Glasgow, LBSS, and Chantilly.

In Megan's words, "when we recognize there is overcrowding, the use of modulars is not a reason that we're fine and meanwhile we've got capacity in surrounding schools." But in the end they put the ball in Dr. Reid's court.

They are mostly lame ducks just making noise now.

Ricardy Anderson is making a big stink about Glasgow because any time there is a boundary study elsewhere in the county she demands a boundary study in Mason. It was built to be a big school. But they can move AAP kids back to Holmes and Poe if they want - no doubt it’s a chaotic school.

Lake Braddock was by design built to be big. In percentage terms it’s not especially overcrowded.

Chantilly is a different situation, and they’ve neglected the overcrowding there for many years. Maybe the negligence of SB members like Pekarsky stands out less if they lump Chantilly together with other schools like Glasgow and LB.

Once more, Chantilly parents are not complaining. The boundary is compact. Little new construction.

Since Chantilly parents say they aren’t complaining (that is, they don’t want to be moved to a less affluent school or one further away), let’s take them at their word. We can spend money elsewhere and relocate more trailers to Chantilly, if needed. There may be little new construction there but they’ll get more kids since fewer Rocky Run and Carson kids are getting into TJ.

Reminder: the formerly Chantilly neighborhoods that were redistricted to Oakton--a much more affluent school--had many, many unhappy parents.

And, FWIW, any student moved out of Chantilly would have to be assigned to a school that is further away. Why do you want to imply it is about a "less affluent" school? Just which "less affluent school" do you think they would be sent to?

Centreville (once expanded), Westfield, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Towards the end of last night's meeting boundaries came up again as they discussed "right-sizing" schools that are overcrowded. Specifically mentioned Glasgow, LBSS, and Chantilly.

In Megan's words, "when we recognize there is overcrowding, the use of modulars is not a reason that we're fine and meanwhile we've got capacity in surrounding schools." But in the end they put the ball in Dr. Reid's court.

They are mostly lame ducks just making noise now.

Ricardy Anderson is making a big stink about Glasgow because any time there is a boundary study elsewhere in the county she demands a boundary study in Mason. It was built to be a big school. But they can move AAP kids back to Holmes and Poe if they want - no doubt it’s a chaotic school.

Lake Braddock was by design built to be big. In percentage terms it’s not especially overcrowded.

Chantilly is a different situation, and they’ve neglected the overcrowding there for many years. Maybe the negligence of SB members like Pekarsky stands out less if they lump Chantilly together with other schools like Glasgow and LB.

Once more, Chantilly parents are not complaining. The boundary is compact. Little new construction.

Since Chantilly parents say they aren’t complaining (that is, they don’t want to be moved to a less affluent school or one further away), let’s take them at their word. We can spend money elsewhere and relocate more trailers to Chantilly, if needed. There may be little new construction there but they’ll get more kids since fewer Rocky Run and Carson kids are getting into TJ.

Reminder: the formerly Chantilly neighborhoods that were redistricted to Oakton--a much more affluent school--had many, many unhappy parents.

And, FWIW, any student moved out of Chantilly would have to be assigned to a school that is further away. Why do you want to imply it is about a "less affluent" school? Just which "less affluent school" do you think they would be sent to?

Oakton family here - I would have much preferred my kid be zoned to Chantilly. The commute to and from Oakton is brutal.

[Anonymous]

We need a new high school in 20171. What would make the most sense would be to turn Carson into a high school and build a new middle school nearby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Instead of making this yet another IB vs. AP debate (they are both fine), let's get back to original topic. Yes making some IB schools AP would help. SB won't do jack because they don't want to stir up the pot. Parents-many in this forum-will freak out with boundary changes if it doesn't go their way. So what is the solution?

Distribute affordable housing across the county instead on concentrating it. Unless that happens, boundary adjustment will always be bitter and career ending for politicians

And, how do you plan to that? Here is a little secret: Many of those schools which currently have lots of "affordable housing" --and , by that I think you mean "low income" housing--were once just fine.

Yes, 1960s single family homes make wonderful multi family homes now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need a new high school in 20171. What would make the most sense would be to turn Carson into a high school and build a new middle school nearby.

New on this forum, aren't you? The SB sold the property adjacent to Carson--which was intended for the new high school. It would have made sense--but then, it would have been difficult to continue to send Carson students to South Lakes and Oakton. Wonder if that had anything to do with the decision.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need a new high school in 20171. What would make the most sense would be to turn Carson into a high school and build a new middle school nearby.

New on this forum, aren't you? The SB sold the property adjacent to Carson--which was intended for the new high school. It would have made sense--but then, it would have been difficult to continue to send Carson students to South Lakes and Oakton. Wonder if that had anything to do with the decision.

Not everyone spends all their time on this forum, maybe consider getting a life, sweetheart.

[Anonymous]

OMG you psycho conspiracy theorists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need a new high school in 20171. What would make the most sense would be to turn Carson into a high school and build a new middle school nearby.

New on this forum, aren't you? The SB sold the property adjacent to Carson--which was intended for the new high school. It would have made sense--but then, it would have been difficult to continue to send Carson students to South Lakes and Oakton. Wonder if that had anything to do with the decision.

Not everyone spends all their time on this forum, maybe consider getting a life, sweetheart.

A high school at Carson has been repeated over and over and over on this forum. It would have made sense, but it is not going to happen.

And, FWIW, it just occurred to me that it would have created the dilemma of what to do with Carson Middle School students who attend South Lakes and Westfield. It would have been very difficult to say that you go to Carson Middle--but not Carson High.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We need a new high school in 20171. What would make the most sense would be to turn Carson into a high school and build a new middle school nearby.

New on this forum, aren't you? The SB sold the property adjacent to Carson--which was intended for the new high school. It would have made sense--but then, it would have been difficult to continue to send Carson students to South Lakes and Oakton. Wonder if that had anything to do with the decision.

Not everyone spends all their time on this forum, maybe consider getting a life, sweetheart.

A high school at Carson has been repeated over and over and over on this forum. It would have made sense, but it is not going to happen.

And, FWIW, it just occurred to me that it would have created the dilemma of what to do with Carson Middle School students who attend South Lakes and Westfield. It would have been very difficult to say that you go to Carson Middle--but not Carson High.

Wouldn’t they have just aligned the boundaries of Carson MS and HS? If it pulled kids out of Oakton, South Lakes and Westfield, then it would also open up space to move kids from Chantilly and Centreville to one or more of those schools.

Instead they are turning Chantilly and Centreville into monster schools with 3000 kids while still pretending they plan to build a new western HS some day somewhere. It’s such a total mess. FCPS planning is terrible and they have zero credibility. Just a total and complete shit show.

[Anonymous]

Wouldn’t they have just aligned the boundaries of Carson MS and HS? If it pulled kids out of Oakton, South Lakes and Westfield, then it would also open up space to move kids from Chantilly and Centreville to one or more of those schools.

It doesn't sound like you are familiar with those neighborhoods. For example, the elementary school boundary that is closest to Carson is also the closest to Franklin. It is a Chantilly High neighborhood.

How would pulling kids who currently go to Oakton to Carson High help Chantilly? The ones who go to Oakton are closer to Oakton than any Chantilly neighborhood. In fact, the Oakton neighborhoods at Carson are also very close to Chantilly.

In any case, the Carson High ship sailed when the SB sold the property to the Saudis. Check out the website of the Saudi school (King Abdullah Academy.)

[Anonymous]

It doesn't sound like you are familiar with those neighborhoods. For example, the elementary school boundary that is closest to Carson is also the closest to Franklin. It is a Chantilly High neighborhood.

And, that neighborhood is zoned to Franklin. Not Carson. However, the neighborhood has a very large AAP contingent at Carson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need a new high school in 20171. What would make the most sense would be to turn Carson into a high school and build a new middle school nearby.

Agree if the SB refused to build a new HS.