FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are there more split feeder changes going to come out? I thought Lemon Road was a split feeder where very few students go to Longfellow/McLean. I did not see them mentioned in this iteration. I saw they moved the small neighborhood out of Westgate to Franklin-Sherman.

Lemon Road is physically located in the area that feeds to Longfellow/McLean. They said in the deck they didn’t look at such split feeders.

Franklin Sherman needs more kids but reassigning kids who literally live next door to Westgate to FS doesn’t make sense.

They need to take a look at the new split feeders they created at schools like Shrevewood, Kilmer, and Longfellow. Sending a very small number of Kilmer kids to McLean or Longfellow kids to Falls Church makes no sense.

They really need to evaluate what they’d be doing to Shrevewood under this plan. It looks like they’re shifting all the apartment complexes off 29 and west of Hollywood Rd to Shrevewood. The presentation says that would add 119 students to Shrevewood and would likely turn it into a Title 1 school. Shrevewood is already hemorrhaging students to Lemon Road’s AAP center. The meeting notes don’t seem to reflect any impact to Shrevewood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of our good friends collectively known as “Langley” on this board, the 60-105 threshold should keep you right where you are, for now. I can’t find any school in or adjacent to the Forestville/Cooper/Langley progression that is currently outside this 60-105 range.

Your biggest concern appears to be that Armstrong ES is currently at 71% capacity but is projected to be at 41% in 29/30 (renovations underway, expected completion by FY2028). By all indications, Thru appears to be focused solely on schools that are currently outside of the 60-105 threshold for this current review.

Moving a portion of Forestville to Armstrong will likely be a focus of the next round of review, in five years, if Armstrong meets its sub-60% projection.

So, Langley, if you have kids that are 6th grade or higher and you don’t care where your house will be zoned when your DC are out of school, you can breath a sigh of relief.

If you do care about where your school is zoned and/or your DC are 5th or lower, maybe focus your energy on getting a different SB elected that tears up policy 8130.8 before the next 5-year review.

Very telling that they apparently set the under-utilization capacity threshold low enough to placate the noisiest parents in the county while proposing to move lots of other kids around to avoid islands and split feeders that weren’t hurting anyone and involve kids traveling far shorter distances to schools than Forestville kids travel to Langley.

FCPS sucks.

Hi, you don’t have to always make this us vs. them. I’m sure these “noisiest parents” support minimal moves across the county. You should try sugar, not vinegar.

Once they come out with the capacity proposals in May that leave Langley untouched you will declare victory and walk away, leaving others as the sacrificial lambs so FCPS can say it “did something.” I’m so sick of this shit.

Who’s going to be the sacrificial lambs? West Springfield parents who are redistributed to Lee?

That's how the WSHS parents feel. Will be VERY interested to see the capacity adjustments.

I don’t know if there’s going to be that change at this point, especially with 100+ leaving Rolling Valley for Saratoga. Yes those kids already (nominally) went to Key and Lewis, but 100 kids out of Rolling Valley is a lot, and will give some flexibility to change the ES boundaries to avoid crowding at the elementary level. Plus they also said that capacity in the 60%s was acceptable. Previously I had heard that they considered under 80% to be under-enrolled.

I think students being reassigned to Lewis will come from Annandale or Edison, which are also both crowded and both closer and an easier drive between the schools. Edison and Lewis are located on the same road and you could easily walk between them.

They have floated a proposal to move Bren Mar Park ES back from Edison to Annandale. Hard to see them proposing to move more Edison kids to Lewis on top of that, and since they are including modular seats they say the BMP move would only put Annandale at 101%. See 4/25 presentation at 19-20.

In fact, the under-enrollment at Lewis wouldn't be an issue, since it's still well over 60% capacity. But, given their repeated focus on the 60%-105% range, it seems likely they'll propose in May to move some kids out of West Springfield (112% in the latest CIP), unless they just decide to focus on ES and not MS or HS. Where they might propose to move them is a different question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[img]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of our good friends collectively known as “Langley” on this board, the 60-105 threshold should keep you right where you are, for now. I can’t find any school in or adjacent to the Forestville/Cooper/Langley progression that is currently outside this 60-105 range.

Your biggest concern appears to be that Armstrong ES is currently at 71% capacity but is projected to be at 41% in 29/30 (renovations underway, expected completion by FY2028). By all indications, Thru appears to be focused solely on schools that are currently outside of the 60-105 threshold for this current review.

Moving a portion of Forestville to Armstrong will likely be a focus of the next round of review, in five years, if Armstrong meets its sub-60% projection.

So, Langley, if you have kids that are 6th grade or higher and you don’t care where your house will be zoned when your DC are out of school, you can breath a sigh of relief.

If you do care about where your school is zoned and/or your DC are 5th or lower, maybe focus your energy on getting a different SB elected that tears up policy 8130.8 before the next 5-year review.

Very telling that they apparently set the under-utilization capacity threshold low enough to placate the noisiest parents in the county while proposing to move lots of other kids around to avoid islands and split feeders that weren’t hurting anyone and involve kids traveling far shorter distances to schools than Forestville kids travel to Langley.

FCPS sucks.

Hi, you don’t have to always make this us vs. them. I’m sure these “noisiest parents” support minimal moves across the county. You should try sugar, not vinegar.

Once they come out with the capacity proposals in May that leave Langley untouched you will declare victory and walk away, leaving others as the sacrificial lambs so FCPS can say it “did something.” I’m so sick of this shit.

Who’s going to be the sacrificial lambs? West Springfield parents who are redistributed to Lee?

That's how the WSHS parents feel. Will be VERY interested to see the capacity adjustments.

I don’t know if there’s going to be that change at this point, especially with 100+ leaving Rolling Valley for Saratoga. Yes those kids already (nominally) went to Key and Lewis, but 100 kids out of Rolling Valley is a lot, and will give some flexibility to change the ES boundaries to avoid crowding at the elementary level. Plus they also said that capacity in the 60%s was acceptable. Previously I had heard that they considered under 80% to be under-enrolled.

I think students being reassigned to Lewis will come from Annandale or Edison, which are also both crowded and both closer and an easier drive between the schools. Edison and Lewis are located on the same road and you could easily walk between them.

But they have WSHS at such a high capacity, I feel like they'll need to address it somehow. Maybe moving some Hunt Valley kids to South County? But then they create a split feeder at Hunt Valley. I'll be watching for those May 5 meeting slides.

I could see a new split feeder at HV. Some of those neighborhoods close to Pohick Rd. Are roughly equidistant to Irving/WSHS and South County, but the bus ride to SC is probably easier on roads with less traffic. It might be hard to get the requisite 25%+ of students though without getting into parts of HV’s boundaries that really are closer to WS.

The Sangster to Newington attendance island and Rolling Valley to Saratoga split feeder changes takes both Newington and Saratoga to capacity, so there is no longer elementary space for any Hunt Valley neighborhoods to move in that direction. Any high school changes would require a new split feeder.

Will they need to make the capacity changes for WSHS from the other end of the zone, such as the Tiverton townhouses and adjacent neighborhood zoned to Keene Mill?

That would also address Keene Mill overcrowding. Those neighborhoods, and Daventry, are the closest to Lewis of any WSHS neighborhoods, but far from Key and separated from Garfield by the church, ballfields, parks and retail space, and from Lewis and Key by the mixing bowl.

Let's hope the Sangster and RV changes, combined possibly with moving the Sangster split feeder from Irving & WSHS to LBSS will be enough to prevent additional rezoning of WSHS.

[Anonymous]

I feel that if they were going to address the Sangster split feeder, they would have done it already. I don’t know if LB can take all of those students without ending up overcrowded itself + Sangster is the AAP center for Hunt Valley and Orange Hunt - which are some of the few remaining schools with NO LLIV. Now FCPS seemingly has no problem with giving some pyramids the short end of the stick on AAP centers and sending their students out of pyramid for AAP, but at least most students do now have a choice to do LLIV at their base schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel that if they were going to address the Sangster split feeder, they would have done it already. I don’t know if LB can take all of those students without ending up overcrowded itself + Sangster is the AAP center for Hunt Valley and Orange Hunt - which are some of the few remaining schools with NO LLIV. Now FCPS seemingly has no problem with giving some pyramids the short end of the stick on AAP centers and sending their students out of pyramid for AAP, but at least most students do now have a choice to do LLIV at their base schools.

Lake Braddock is under capacity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel that if they were going to address the Sangster split feeder, they would have done it already. I don’t know if LB can take all of those students without ending up overcrowded itself + Sangster is the AAP center for Hunt Valley and Orange Hunt - which are some of the few remaining schools with NO LLIV. Now FCPS seemingly has no problem with giving some pyramids the short end of the stick on AAP centers and sending their students out of pyramid for AAP, but at least most students do now have a choice to do LLIV at their base schools.

Correcting the Sangster split feeder would fix WSHS capacity in a non controversial way that does not involve rezoning.

It is also the only equal quality rezoning option (WSHS to LBSS vs WSHS to Lewis)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel that if they were going to address the Sangster split feeder, they would have done it already. I don’t know if LB can take all of those students without ending up overcrowded itself + Sangster is the AAP center for Hunt Valley and Orange Hunt - which are some of the few remaining schools with NO LLIV. Now FCPS seemingly has no problem with giving some pyramids the short end of the stick on AAP centers and sending their students out of pyramid for AAP, but at least most students do now have a choice to do LLIV at their base schools.

Lake Braddock is under capacity

It’s showing on FCPS’s capacity dashboard as 95% now, projected 96%. So a little under but not too much. I don’t know how many additional students it would pick up if the Sangster split was sent all to LB - 150 maybe? Would that be too many or would it be doable? I actually don’t know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of our good friends collectively known as “Langley” on this board, the 60-105 threshold should keep you right where you are, for now. I can’t find any school in or adjacent to the Forestville/Cooper/Langley progression that is currently outside this 60-105 range.

Your biggest concern appears to be that Armstrong ES is currently at 71% capacity but is projected to be at 41% in 29/30 (renovations underway, expected completion by FY2028). By all indications, Thru appears to be focused solely on schools that are currently outside of the 60-105 threshold for this current review.

Moving a portion of Forestville to Armstrong will likely be a focus of the next round of review, in five years, if Armstrong meets its sub-60% projection.

So, Langley, if you have kids that are 6th grade or higher and you don’t care where your house will be zoned when your DC are out of school, you can breath a sigh of relief.

If you do care about where your school is zoned and/or your DC are 5th or lower, maybe focus your energy on getting a different SB elected that tears up policy 8130.8 before the next 5-year review.

Very telling that they apparently set the under-utilization capacity threshold low enough to placate the noisiest parents in the county while proposing to move lots of other kids around to avoid islands and split feeders that weren’t hurting anyone and involve kids traveling far shorter distances to schools than Forestville kids travel to Langley.

FCPS sucks.

Hi, you don’t have to always make this us vs. them. I’m sure these “noisiest parents” support minimal moves across the county. You should try sugar, not vinegar.

Once they come out with the capacity proposals in May that leave Langley untouched you will declare victory and walk away, leaving others as the sacrificial lambs so FCPS can say it “did something.” I’m so sick of this shit.

Who’s going to be the sacrificial lambs? West Springfield parents who are redistributed to Lee?

That's how the WSHS parents feel. Will be VERY interested to see the capacity adjustments.

I don’t know if there’s going to be that change at this point, especially with 100+ leaving Rolling Valley for Saratoga. Yes those kids already (nominally) went to Key and Lewis, but 100 kids out of Rolling Valley is a lot, and will give some flexibility to change the ES boundaries to avoid crowding at the elementary level. Plus they also said that capacity in the 60%s was acceptable. Previously I had heard that they considered under 80% to be under-enrolled.

I think students being reassigned to Lewis will come from Annandale or Edison, which are also both crowded and both closer and an easier drive between the schools. Edison and Lewis are located on the same road and you could easily walk between them.

But they have WSHS at such a high capacity, I feel like they'll need to address it somehow. Maybe moving some Hunt Valley kids to South County? But then they create a split feeder at Hunt Valley. I'll be watching for those May 5 meeting slides.

The school board did not address the Sangster split feeder where one neighborhood goes to Irving and WSHS while the rest of the students go to Lake Braddock. Moving all of Sangster to LB might be enough to stave off rezoning WSHS.

But on the note of Rolling Valley, those apartments inside the parkway that are marked to mive to Saratoga don't currently go to Lewis. Those students go to WSHS. Are they not currently zoned for WSHS? I think many of the Rolling Valley students outside the parkway also attend WSHS, although they are definitely zoned for Lewis.

No that’s not true. They only took rolling valley kids who already go to key/lewis. The green line is the key/lewis boundary and they just matched up those rolling valley kids with Saratoga. So now all RVES kids go to Irving/WSHS, moving the small group of RV kids who went to key/lewis to Saratoga. The townhome community on the west side of rolling road that is north of the ffx county parkway has always gone to RVES, key, Lewis and with Chang’s would be Saratoga, key, Lewis. They were the first community south of RV that is bussed instead of walkers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:[img]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of our good friends collectively known as “Langley” on this board, the 60-105 threshold should keep you right where you are, for now. I can’t find any school in or adjacent to the Forestville/Cooper/Langley progression that is currently outside this 60-105 range.

Your biggest concern appears to be that Armstrong ES is currently at 71% capacity but is projected to be at 41% in 29/30 (renovations underway, expected completion by FY2028). By all indications, Thru appears to be focused solely on schools that are currently outside of the 60-105 threshold for this current review.

Moving a portion of Forestville to Armstrong will likely be a focus of the next round of review, in five years, if Armstrong meets its sub-60% projection.

So, Langley, if you have kids that are 6th grade or higher and you don’t care where your house will be zoned when your DC are out of school, you can breath a sigh of relief.

If you do care about where your school is zoned and/or your DC are 5th or lower, maybe focus your energy on getting a different SB elected that tears up policy 8130.8 before the next 5-year review.

Very telling that they apparently set the under-utilization capacity threshold low enough to placate the noisiest parents in the county while proposing to move lots of other kids around to avoid islands and split feeders that weren’t hurting anyone and involve kids traveling far shorter distances to schools than Forestville kids travel to Langley.

FCPS sucks.

Hi, you don’t have to always make this us vs. them. I’m sure these “noisiest parents” support minimal moves across the county. You should try sugar, not vinegar.

Once they come out with the capacity proposals in May that leave Langley untouched you will declare victory and walk away, leaving others as the sacrificial lambs so FCPS can say it “did something.” I’m so sick of this shit.

Who’s going to be the sacrificial lambs? West Springfield parents who are redistributed to Lee?

That's how the WSHS parents feel. Will be VERY interested to see the capacity adjustments.

I don’t know if there’s going to be that change at this point, especially with 100+ leaving Rolling Valley for Saratoga. Yes those kids already (nominally) went to Key and Lewis, but 100 kids out of Rolling Valley is a lot, and will give some flexibility to change the ES boundaries to avoid crowding at the elementary level. Plus they also said that capacity in the 60%s was acceptable. Previously I had heard that they considered under 80% to be under-enrolled.

I think students being reassigned to Lewis will come from Annandale or Edison, which are also both crowded and both closer and an easier drive between the schools. Edison and Lewis are located on the same road and you could easily walk between them.

But they have WSHS at such a high capacity, I feel like they'll need to address it somehow. Maybe moving some Hunt Valley kids to South County? But then they create a split feeder at Hunt Valley. I'll be watching for those May 5 meeting slides.

I could see a new split feeder at HV. Some of those neighborhoods close to Pohick Rd. Are roughly equidistant to Irving/WSHS and South County, but the bus ride to SC is probably easier on roads with less traffic. It might be hard to get the requisite 25%+ of students though without getting into parts of HV’s boundaries that really are closer to WS.

The Sangster to Newington attendance island and Rolling Valley to Saratoga split feeder changes takes both Newington and Saratoga to capacity, so there is no longer elementary space for any Hunt Valley neighborhoods to move in that direction. Any high school changes would require a new split feeder.

Will they need to make the capacity changes for WSHS from the other end of the zone, such as the Tiverton townhouses and adjacent neighborhood zoned to Keene Mill?

That would also address Keene Mill overcrowding. Those neighborhoods, and Daventry, are the closest to Lewis of any WSHS neighborhoods, but far from Key and separated from Garfield by the church, ballfields, parks and retail space, and from Lewis and Key by the mixing bowl.

Let's hope the Sangster and RV changes, combined possibly with moving the Sangster split feeder from Irving & WSHS to LBSS will be enough to prevent additional rezoning of WSHS.

Just to be clear, the rolling valley changes don’t affect Irving/ WSHS capacity. Every kid that was moved to Saratoga from RV already was zoned for key/lewis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel that if they were going to address the Sangster split feeder, they would have done it already. I don’t know if LB can take all of those students without ending up overcrowded itself + Sangster is the AAP center for Hunt Valley and Orange Hunt - which are some of the few remaining schools with NO LLIV. Now FCPS seemingly has no problem with giving some pyramids the short end of the stick on AAP centers and sending their students out of pyramid for AAP, but at least most students do now have a choice to do LLIV at their base schools.

Sangster is physically located within WSHS boundaries (barely) so by the consultants criteria, it wasn’t included in the study.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of our good friends collectively known as “Langley” on this board, the 60-105 threshold should keep you right where you are, for now. I can’t find any school in or adjacent to the Forestville/Cooper/Langley progression that is currently outside this 60-105 range.

Your biggest concern appears to be that Armstrong ES is currently at 71% capacity but is projected to be at 41% in 29/30 (renovations underway, expected completion by FY2028). By all indications, Thru appears to be focused solely on schools that are currently outside of the 60-105 threshold for this current review.

Moving a portion of Forestville to Armstrong will likely be a focus of the next round of review, in five years, if Armstrong meets its sub-60% projection.

So, Langley, if you have kids that are 6th grade or higher and you don’t care where your house will be zoned when your DC are out of school, you can breath a sigh of relief.

If you do care about where your school is zoned and/or your DC are 5th or lower, maybe focus your energy on getting a different SB elected that tears up policy 8130.8 before the next 5-year review.

Very telling that they apparently set the under-utilization capacity threshold low enough to placate the noisiest parents in the county while proposing to move lots of other kids around to avoid islands and split feeders that weren’t hurting anyone and involve kids traveling far shorter distances to schools than Forestville kids travel to Langley.

FCPS sucks.

Hi, you don’t have to always make this us vs. them. I’m sure these “noisiest parents” support minimal moves across the county. You should try sugar, not vinegar.

Once they come out with the capacity proposals in May that leave Langley untouched you will declare victory and walk away, leaving others as the sacrificial lambs so FCPS can say it “did something.” I’m so sick of this shit.

Who’s going to be the sacrificial lambs? West Springfield parents who are redistributed to Lee?

That's how the WSHS parents feel. Will be VERY interested to see the capacity adjustments.

I don’t know if there’s going to be that change at this point, especially with 100+ leaving Rolling Valley for Saratoga. Yes those kids already (nominally) went to Key and Lewis, but 100 kids out of Rolling Valley is a lot, and will give some flexibility to change the ES boundaries to avoid crowding at the elementary level. Plus they also said that capacity in the 60%s was acceptable. Previously I had heard that they considered under 80% to be under-enrolled.

I think students being reassigned to Lewis will come from Annandale or Edison, which are also both crowded and both closer and an easier drive between the schools. Edison and Lewis are located on the same road and you could easily walk between them.

But they have WSHS at such a high capacity, I feel like they'll need to address it somehow. Maybe moving some Hunt Valley kids to South County? But then they create a split feeder at Hunt Valley. I'll be watching for those May 5 meeting slides.

The school board did not address the Sangster split feeder where one neighborhood goes to Irving and WSHS while the rest of the students go to Lake Braddock. Moving all of Sangster to LB might be enough to stave off rezoning WSHS.

But on the note of Rolling Valley, those apartments inside the parkway that are marked to mive to Saratoga don't currently go to Lewis. Those students go to WSHS. Are they not currently zoned for WSHS? I think many of the Rolling Valley students outside the parkway also attend WSHS, although they are definitely zoned for Lewis.

No that’s not true. They only took rolling valley kids who already go to key/lewis. The green line is the key/lewis boundary and they just matched up those rolling valley kids with Saratoga. So now all RVES kids go to Irving/WSHS, moving the small group of RV kids who went to key/lewis to Saratoga. The townhome community on the west side of rolling road that is north of the ffx county parkway has always gone to RVES, key, Lewis and with Chang’s would be Saratoga, key, Lewis. They were the first community south of RV that is bussed instead of walkers.

The line goes inside the parkway to those apartments and housing along Rolling Rd on the WSHS side of the the FC Pkwy.

Isn't all of the stuff on the WSHS side of the parkway zoned for WSHS?

[Anonymous]

I don't think the number of students included in the Sangster - Irving - WSHS pyramid is enough to make a huge dent in the WSHS overcrowding. (Maybe 7-8 students per grade, if that.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of our good friends collectively known as “Langley” on this board, the 60-105 threshold should keep you right where you are, for now. I can’t find any school in or adjacent to the Forestville/Cooper/Langley progression that is currently outside this 60-105 range.

Your biggest concern appears to be that Armstrong ES is currently at 71% capacity but is projected to be at 41% in 29/30 (renovations underway, expected completion by FY2028). By all indications, Thru appears to be focused solely on schools that are currently outside of the 60-105 threshold for this current review.

Moving a portion of Forestville to Armstrong will likely be a focus of the next round of review, in five years, if Armstrong meets its sub-60% projection.

So, Langley, if you have kids that are 6th grade or higher and you don’t care where your house will be zoned when your DC are out of school, you can breath a sigh of relief.

If you do care about where your school is zoned and/or your DC are 5th or lower, maybe focus your energy on getting a different SB elected that tears up policy 8130.8 before the next 5-year review.

Very telling that they apparently set the under-utilization capacity threshold low enough to placate the noisiest parents in the county while proposing to move lots of other kids around to avoid islands and split feeders that weren’t hurting anyone and involve kids traveling far shorter distances to schools than Forestville kids travel to Langley.

FCPS sucks.

Hi, you don’t have to always make this us vs. them. I’m sure these “noisiest parents” support minimal moves across the county. You should try sugar, not vinegar.

Once they come out with the capacity proposals in May that leave Langley untouched you will declare victory and walk away, leaving others as the sacrificial lambs so FCPS can say it “did something.” I’m so sick of this shit.

Who’s going to be the sacrificial lambs? West Springfield parents who are redistributed to Lee?

That's how the WSHS parents feel. Will be VERY interested to see the capacity adjustments.

I don’t know if there’s going to be that change at this point, especially with 100+ leaving Rolling Valley for Saratoga. Yes those kids already (nominally) went to Key and Lewis, but 100 kids out of Rolling Valley is a lot, and will give some flexibility to change the ES boundaries to avoid crowding at the elementary level. Plus they also said that capacity in the 60%s was acceptable. Previously I had heard that they considered under 80% to be under-enrolled.

I think students being reassigned to Lewis will come from Annandale or Edison, which are also both crowded and both closer and an easier drive between the schools. Edison and Lewis are located on the same road and you could easily walk between them.

But they have WSHS at such a high capacity, I feel like they'll need to address it somehow. Maybe moving some Hunt Valley kids to South County? But then they create a split feeder at Hunt Valley. I'll be watching for those May 5 meeting slides.

The school board did not address the Sangster split feeder where one neighborhood goes to Irving and WSHS while the rest of the students go to Lake Braddock. Moving all of Sangster to LB might be enough to stave off rezoning WSHS.

But on the note of Rolling Valley, those apartments inside the parkway that are marked to mive to Saratoga don't currently go to Lewis. Those students go to WSHS. Are they not currently zoned for WSHS? I think many of the Rolling Valley students outside the parkway also attend WSHS, although they are definitely zoned for Lewis.

No that’s not true. They only took rolling valley kids who already go to key/lewis. The green line is the key/lewis boundary and they just matched up those rolling valley kids with Saratoga. So now all RVES kids go to Irving/WSHS, moving the small group of RV kids who went to key/lewis to Saratoga. The townhome community on the west side of rolling road that is north of the ffx county parkway has always gone to RVES, key, Lewis and with Chang’s would be Saratoga, key, Lewis. They were the first community south of RV that is bussed instead of walkers.

But those students attend WSHS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of our good friends collectively known as “Langley” on this board, the 60-105 threshold should keep you right where you are, for now. I can’t find any school in or adjacent to the Forestville/Cooper/Langley progression that is currently outside this 60-105 range.

Your biggest concern appears to be that Armstrong ES is currently at 71% capacity but is projected to be at 41% in 29/30 (renovations underway, expected completion by FY2028). By all indications, Thru appears to be focused solely on schools that are currently outside of the 60-105 threshold for this current review.

Moving a portion of Forestville to Armstrong will likely be a focus of the next round of review, in five years, if Armstrong meets its sub-60% projection.

So, Langley, if you have kids that are 6th grade or higher and you don’t care where your house will be zoned when your DC are out of school, you can breath a sigh of relief.

If you do care about where your school is zoned and/or your DC are 5th or lower, maybe focus your energy on getting a different SB elected that tears up policy 8130.8 before the next 5-year review.

Very telling that they apparently set the under-utilization capacity threshold low enough to placate the noisiest parents in the county while proposing to move lots of other kids around to avoid islands and split feeders that weren’t hurting anyone and involve kids traveling far shorter distances to schools than Forestville kids travel to Langley.

FCPS sucks.

Hi, you don’t have to always make this us vs. them. I’m sure these “noisiest parents” support minimal moves across the county. You should try sugar, not vinegar.

Once they come out with the capacity proposals in May that leave Langley untouched you will declare victory and walk away, leaving others as the sacrificial lambs so FCPS can say it “did something.” I’m so sick of this shit.

Who’s going to be the sacrificial lambs? West Springfield parents who are redistributed to Lee?

That's how the WSHS parents feel. Will be VERY interested to see the capacity adjustments.

I don’t know if there’s going to be that change at this point, especially with 100+ leaving Rolling Valley for Saratoga. Yes those kids already (nominally) went to Key and Lewis, but 100 kids out of Rolling Valley is a lot, and will give some flexibility to change the ES boundaries to avoid crowding at the elementary level. Plus they also said that capacity in the 60%s was acceptable. Previously I had heard that they considered under 80% to be under-enrolled.

I think students being reassigned to Lewis will come from Annandale or Edison, which are also both crowded and both closer and an easier drive between the schools. Edison and Lewis are located on the same road and you could easily walk between them.

But they have WSHS at such a high capacity, I feel like they'll need to address it somehow. Maybe moving some Hunt Valley kids to South County? But then they create a split feeder at Hunt Valley. I'll be watching for those May 5 meeting slides.

The school board did not address the Sangster split feeder where one neighborhood goes to Irving and WSHS while the rest of the students go to Lake Braddock. Moving all of Sangster to LB might be enough to stave off rezoning WSHS.

But on the note of Rolling Valley, those apartments inside the parkway that are marked to mive to Saratoga don't currently go to Lewis. Those students go to WSHS. Are they not currently zoned for WSHS? I think many of the Rolling Valley students outside the parkway also attend WSHS, although they are definitely zoned for Lewis.

No that’s not true. They only took rolling valley kids who already go to key/lewis. The green line is the key/lewis boundary and they just matched up those rolling valley kids with Saratoga. So now all RVES kids go to Irving/WSHS, moving the small group of RV kids who went to key/lewis to Saratoga. The townhome community on the west side of rolling road that is north of the ffx county parkway has always gone to RVES, key, Lewis and with Chang’s would be Saratoga, key, Lewis. They were the first community south of RV that is bussed instead of walkers.

The line goes inside the parkway to those apartments and housing along Rolling Rd on the WSHS side of the the FC Pkwy.

Isn't all of the stuff on the WSHS side of the parkway zoned for WSHS?

No, it’s not. Everything south of the Winter Forest subdivision is already RVES/key/lewis. It’s a weird split and always has been.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of our good friends collectively known as “Langley” on this board, the 60-105 threshold should keep you right where you are, for now. I can’t find any school in or adjacent to the Forestville/Cooper/Langley progression that is currently outside this 60-105 range.

Your biggest concern appears to be that Armstrong ES is currently at 71% capacity but is projected to be at 41% in 29/30 (renovations underway, expected completion by FY2028). By all indications, Thru appears to be focused solely on schools that are currently outside of the 60-105 threshold for this current review.

Moving a portion of Forestville to Armstrong will likely be a focus of the next round of review, in five years, if Armstrong meets its sub-60% projection.

So, Langley, if you have kids that are 6th grade or higher and you don’t care where your house will be zoned when your DC are out of school, you can breath a sigh of relief.

If you do care about where your school is zoned and/or your DC are 5th or lower, maybe focus your energy on getting a different SB elected that tears up policy 8130.8 before the next 5-year review.

Very telling that they apparently set the under-utilization capacity threshold low enough to placate the noisiest parents in the county while proposing to move lots of other kids around to avoid islands and split feeders that weren’t hurting anyone and involve kids traveling far shorter distances to schools than Forestville kids travel to Langley.

FCPS sucks.

Hi, you don’t have to always make this us vs. them. I’m sure these “noisiest parents” support minimal moves across the county. You should try sugar, not vinegar.

Once they come out with the capacity proposals in May that leave Langley untouched you will declare victory and walk away, leaving others as the sacrificial lambs so FCPS can say it “did something.” I’m so sick of this shit.

Who’s going to be the sacrificial lambs? West Springfield parents who are redistributed to Lee?

That's how the WSHS parents feel. Will be VERY interested to see the capacity adjustments.

I don’t know if there’s going to be that change at this point, especially with 100+ leaving Rolling Valley for Saratoga. Yes those kids already (nominally) went to Key and Lewis, but 100 kids out of Rolling Valley is a lot, and will give some flexibility to change the ES boundaries to avoid crowding at the elementary level. Plus they also said that capacity in the 60%s was acceptable. Previously I had heard that they considered under 80% to be under-enrolled.

I think students being reassigned to Lewis will come from Annandale or Edison, which are also both crowded and both closer and an easier drive between the schools. Edison and Lewis are located on the same road and you could easily walk between them.

But they have WSHS at such a high capacity, I feel like they'll need to address it somehow. Maybe moving some Hunt Valley kids to South County? But then they create a split feeder at Hunt Valley. I'll be watching for those May 5 meeting slides.

The school board did not address the Sangster split feeder where one neighborhood goes to Irving and WSHS while the rest of the students go to Lake Braddock. Moving all of Sangster to LB might be enough to stave off rezoning WSHS.

But on the note of Rolling Valley, those apartments inside the parkway that are marked to mive to Saratoga don't currently go to Lewis. Those students go to WSHS. Are they not currently zoned for WSHS? I think many of the Rolling Valley students outside the parkway also attend WSHS, although they are definitely zoned for Lewis.

No that’s not true. They only took rolling valley kids who already go to key/lewis. The green line is the key/lewis boundary and they just matched up those rolling valley kids with Saratoga. So now all RVES kids go to Irving/WSHS, moving the small group of RV kids who went to key/lewis to Saratoga. The townhome community on the west side of rolling road that is north of the ffx county parkway has always gone to RVES, key, Lewis and with Chang’s would be Saratoga, key, Lewis. They were the first community south of RV that is bussed instead of walkers.

The line goes inside the parkway to those apartments and housing along Rolling Rd on the WSHS side of the the FC Pkwy.

Isn't all of the stuff on the WSHS side of the parkway zoned for WSHS?

No, it’s not. Everything south of the Winter Forest subdivision is already RVES/key/lewis. It’s a weird split and always has been.

Don't a lot of those kids attend WSHS though?