FaifaxOne Issue?

[Anonymous]

Interesting...I guess they’re trying to get OHS kids into a pyramid of TMS/FMS/RCMS so want all OHS pyramid kids in same ES feeders to those schools. I highly doubt MWES will be moving to FHS-95% of MWES kids walk to OHS. The other 5% are bused, but could walk.

I wouldn’t be surprised if hunter mill estates comes back to OHS.

[Anonymous]

It’s kind of typical Gatehouse speak, but I don’t think they are talking about moving kids from South Lakes to Oakton. They are talking about eventually moving Oakton-bound kids from Waples Mill who attend the AAP center at Hunters Woods to an elementary school in the Oakton rather than South Lakes “pyramid.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s kind of typical Gatehouse speak, but I don’t think they are talking about moving kids from South Lakes to Oakton. They are talking about eventually moving Oakton-bound kids from Waples Mill who attend the AAP center at Hunters Woods to an elementary school in the Oakton rather than South Lakes “pyramid.”

And hopefully reducing the population at Mosby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s kind of typical Gatehouse speak, but I don’t think they are talking about moving kids from South Lakes to Oakton. They are talking about eventually moving Oakton-bound kids from Waples Mill who attend the AAP center at Hunters Woods to an elementary school in the Oakton rather than South Lakes “pyramid.”

They've always shifted the "speak" to meet whatever they wish to do. For example, when Crossfield was initially split between Oakton and South Lakes, the split feeder was "not a problem." It was brought up by parents of Fox Mill Woods at the time. They initially went to Oakton. Half the neighborhood wanted to go to the Reston school and half wanted to stay with Oakton(It may have been more than half.) It was very emotional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interesting...I guess they’re trying to get OHS kids into a pyramid of TMS/FMS/RCMS so want all OHS pyramid kids in same ES feeders to those schools. I highly doubt MWES will be moving to FHS-95% of MWES kids walk to OHS. The other 5% are bused, but could walk.

I wouldn’t be surprised if hunter mill estates comes back to OHS.

Is this new construction pyramid based? See page 128 of 188 on the CIP. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed_FY_2020-24_CIP_0.pdf

If zero additional ES capacity is added for 2023-24 from 2018-19 there is a surplus of 10,993 seats for the program [not as constructed] capacity at the elementary school level. 36 million plus for any new school? With that open capacity FCPS should use it's economy of scale and domino boundary changes.

Especially if at one new school site potential attendees object.

[Anonymous]

Why aren't they focusing on getting Oakton High school to come from less than 4 feeder schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting...I guess they’re trying to get OHS kids into a pyramid of TMS/FMS/RCMS so want all OHS pyramid kids in same ES feeders to those schools. I highly doubt MWES will be moving to FHS-95% of MWES kids walk to OHS. The other 5% are bused, but could walk.

I wouldn’t be surprised if hunter mill estates comes back to OHS.

Is this new construction pyramid based? See page 128 of 188 on the CIP. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed_FY_2020-24_CIP_0.pdf

If zero additional ES capacity is added for 2023-24 from 2018-19 there is a surplus of 10,993 seats for the program [not as constructed] capacity at the elementary school level. 36 million plus for any new school? With that open capacity FCPS should use it's economy of scale and domino boundary changes.

Especially if at one new school site potential attendees object.

Chabtilly is where they need schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s kind of typical Gatehouse speak, but I don’t think they are talking about moving kids from South Lakes to Oakton. They are talking about eventually moving Oakton-bound kids from Waples Mill who attend the AAP center at Hunters Woods to an elementary school in the Oakton rather than South Lakes “pyramid.”

They've always shifted the "speak" to meet whatever they wish to do. For example, when Crossfield was initially split between Oakton and South Lakes, the split feeder was "not a problem." It was brought up by parents of Fox Mill Woods at the time. They initially went to Oakton. Half the neighborhood wanted to go to the Reston school and half wanted to stay with Oakton(It may have been more than half.) It was very emotional.

Yes, "speak." When they did the South Lakes redistricting, the "speak" was that the optimum school size for high schools was 2000--and that is why they had to redistrict so many kids. Seriously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s kind of typical Gatehouse speak, but I don’t think they are talking about moving kids from South Lakes to Oakton. They are talking about eventually moving Oakton-bound kids from Waples Mill who attend the AAP center at Hunters Woods to an elementary school in the Oakton rather than South Lakes “pyramid.”

They've always shifted the "speak" to meet whatever they wish to do. For example, when Crossfield was initially split between Oakton and South Lakes, the split feeder was "not a problem." It was brought up by parents of Fox Mill Woods at the time. They initially went to Oakton. Half the neighborhood wanted to go to the Reston school and half wanted to stay with Oakton(It may have been more than half.) It was very emotional.

Yes, "speak." When they did the South Lakes redistricting, the "speak" was that the optimum school size for high schools was 2000--and that is why they had to redistrict so many kids. Seriously.

P.S. and this was right after the SB added an addition to Westfield that put it over 3000. A short time later, because Stu wanted to ship kids to South Lakes, no high school should be over 2000..........Gatehouse "speak."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s kind of typical Gatehouse speak, but I don’t think they are talking about moving kids from South Lakes to Oakton. They are talking about eventually moving Oakton-bound kids from Waples Mill who attend the AAP center at Hunters Woods to an elementary school in the Oakton rather than South Lakes “pyramid.”

They've always shifted the "speak" to meet whatever they wish to do. For example, when Crossfield was initially split between Oakton and South Lakes, the split feeder was "not a problem." It was brought up by parents of Fox Mill Woods at the time. They initially went to Oakton. Half the neighborhood wanted to go to the Reston school and half wanted to stay with Oakton(It may have been more than half.) It was very emotional.

Yes, "speak." When they did the South Lakes redistricting, the "speak" was that the optimum school size for high schools was 2000--and that is why they had to redistrict so many kids. Seriously.

I thought it was 2100, but yes.

Split feeders should be eliminated, unless we decide to split a school even more (ex: Carson, Thoreau).

Attendance islands should be eliminated, unless we decide to create one (ex: Fairfax).

Demographics should be considered, unless we decide to ignore them and concentrate poverty in certain schools (ex: Annandale, Lee)

2000 or 2100 students is the ideal high school size, until we decide additions are cheaper and we should go big (ex: additions at South Lakes, and planned for other schools).

Because these principles are honored largely in the breach, FCPS ends up with the exact opposite of a level playing field.

[Anonymous]

I thought it was 2100, but yes

You are probably correct. The point was that it was used as a "talking point" for why they needed to shift kids from Westfield. They also shifted kids from Oakton to South Lakes and then had to backfill Oakton with kids from Chantilly--even though they were only about a mile or so from Chantilly.

All because 2100 was the FCPS policy. ...........

The SB decides what they want to do--based on politics, and then come up with a rationale that suits them.

During that boundary issue it was 2100. Now, it appears to be no split feeders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting...I guess they’re trying to get OHS kids into a pyramid of TMS/FMS/RCMS so want all OHS pyramid kids in same ES feeders to those schools. I highly doubt MWES will be moving to FHS-95% of MWES kids walk to OHS. The other 5% are bused, but could walk.

I wouldn’t be surprised if hunter mill estates comes back to OHS.

Is this new construction pyramid based? See page 128 of 188 on the CIP. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed_FY_2020-24_CIP_0.pdf

If zero additional ES capacity is added for 2023-24 from 2018-19 there is a surplus of 10,993 seats for the program [not as constructed] capacity at the elementary school level. 36 million plus for any new school? With that open capacity FCPS should use it's economy of scale and domino boundary changes.

Especially if at one new school site potential attendees object.

I can’t read the print on the page you cited (too small) would you please explain further. Please explain the domino boundaries concept?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting...I guess they’re trying to get OHS kids into a pyramid of TMS/FMS/RCMS so want all OHS pyramid kids in same ES feeders to those schools. I highly doubt MWES will be moving to FHS-95% of MWES kids walk to OHS. The other 5% are bused, but could walk.

I wouldn’t be surprised if hunter mill estates comes back to OHS.

Is this new construction pyramid based? See page 128 of 188 on the CIP. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed_FY_2020-24_CIP_0.pdf

If zero additional ES capacity is added for 2023-24 from 2018-19 there is a surplus of 10,993 seats for the program [not as constructed] capacity at the elementary school level. 36 million plus for any new school? With that open capacity FCPS should use it's economy of scale and domino boundary changes.

Especially if at one new school site potential attendees object.

I can’t read the print on the page you cited (too small) would you please explain further. Please explain the domino boundaries concept?

??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting...I guess they’re trying to get OHS kids into a pyramid of TMS/FMS/RCMS so want all OHS pyramid kids in same ES feeders to those schools. I highly doubt MWES will be moving to FHS-95% of MWES kids walk to OHS. The other 5% are bused, but could walk.

I wouldn’t be surprised if hunter mill estates comes back to OHS.

Is this new construction pyramid based? See page 128 of 188 on the CIP. https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/media/pdf/Proposed_FY_2020-24_CIP_0.pdf

If zero additional ES capacity is added for 2023-24 from 2018-19 there is a surplus of 10,993 seats for the program [not as constructed] capacity at the elementary school level. 36 million plus for any new school? With that open capacity FCPS should use it's economy of scale and domino boundary changes.

Especially if at one new school site potential attendees object.

I can’t read the print on the page you cited (too small) would you please explain further. Please explain the domino boundaries concept?

??

If someone can’t figure out how to increase the size of the print in a .PDF file, there’s probably no point in trying to explain other concepts.

[Anonymous]

NP. The page shows that most schools will not be over capacity. The exception is Chantilly Pyramid schools. They will be the highest over capacity.