FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Actually it looks like they’re trying to move students out of Silverbrook to Sangster and Lake Braddock. Is anyone else seeing this?. Neither of those schools needs to gain or lose students at this point. What a mess. Can’t believe they released those maps in the PowerPoint slides and then gave us this mess instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Serious question - why are the Langley posters still on here every day insulting people and complaining about “equity warriors “ when Thru isn’t even proposing to move them to Herndon? Are they worried the School Board will reject the Thru proposals and move them anyway?

I’m here because even if my area isn’t moved, I know that unnecessary boundary changes for anyone in the county will lead to negative mental health outcomes for those students and a loss of tax revenue for the county.

Sometimes you gotta look out for the broader community - in this case my neighbors and families in the county.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interestingly, the three scenarios for Hunt Valley are all different. 1 is no students (that I could tell?) to South County, 2 is some neighborhoods, and 3 is almost everything south of the parkway apart from a small section.

This map shows the Halley attendance island moving to Gunston ES and staying at South County.

It shows some amount of Sangster moving to Silverbrook and South County

There’s a lot going on here. Need to dig in further.

I think the word "scenario" is misleading. The first map of changes is attendance islands, the second adds split feeders, and the third adds capacity changes.

There does seem to be no proposal to move kids out of Hunt Valley, just creating a split feeder school between Irving/WS and SC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Interestingly, the three scenarios for Hunt Valley are all different. 1 is no students (that I could tell?) to South County, 2 is some neighborhoods, and 3 is almost everything south of the parkway apart from a small section.

This map shows the Halley attendance island moving to Gunston ES and staying at South County.

It shows some amount of Sangster moving to Silverbrook and South County

There’s a lot going on here. Need to dig in further.

I didn't see that? It shows that Sangster's attendance stays the same under all 3 scenarios. Unless I'm reading this wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Actually it looks like they’re trying to move students out of Silverbrook to Sangster and Lake Braddock. Is anyone else seeing this?. Neither of those schools needs to gain or lose students at this point. What a mess. Can’t believe they released those maps in the PowerPoint slides and then gave us this mess instead.

Wait... what?

They are moving Sangster students from Sangster and Lake Braddock to Newington Forest and South County.

Why would they turn around and move kids from a third, farther away elementary school back into those Sangster spots?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Super angry how different this is than the scenarios…

Which neighborhoods. Ours looks similar, but still troubling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Super angry how different this is than the scenarios…

Which neighborhoods. Ours looks similar, but still troubling.

The Marshall/McLean/Falls Church area is totally different.

[Anonymous]

In a couple of the scenarios, the color "bleeds" beyond what looks like the boundary line and is misleading. What looks like it is staying the same is really moving if you look carefully.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually it looks like they’re trying to move students out of Silverbrook to Sangster and Lake Braddock. Is anyone else seeing this?. Neither of those schools needs to gain or lose students at this point. What a mess. Can’t believe they released those maps in the PowerPoint slides and then gave us this mess instead.

Wait... what?

They are moving Sangster students from Sangster and Lake Braddock to Newington Forest and South County.

Why would they turn around and move kids from a third, farther away elementary school back into those Sangster spots?

Look at the north-westernmost part of Silverbrook’s boundary on these maps and there is a change. It’s the streets off Silverbrook closer to 123 - Oak Hollow, Oak Bridge etc.

[Anonymous]

In all three ppt scenarios - we had no change and no in all three ms and hs change. Falls Church area

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually it looks like they’re trying to move students out of Silverbrook to Sangster and Lake Braddock. Is anyone else seeing this?. Neither of those schools needs to gain or lose students at this point. What a mess. Can’t believe they released those maps in the PowerPoint slides and then gave us this mess instead.

Wait... what?

They are moving Sangster students from Sangster and Lake Braddock to Newington Forest and South County.

Why would they turn around and move kids from a third, farther away elementary school back into those Sangster spots?

Look at the north-westernmost part of Silverbrook’s boundary on these maps and there is a change. It’s the streets off Silverbrook closer to 123 - Oak Hollow, Oak Bridge etc.

You are reading the maps wrong.

They list all the changes in the boxes below the map.

Silverbrook is not listed for rezoning

[Anonymous]

So, Do they plan to adjust scenarios? For example, what if Westfield parents hate scenario 3, but South County loves it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually it looks like they’re trying to move students out of Silverbrook to Sangster and Lake Braddock. Is anyone else seeing this?. Neither of those schools needs to gain or lose students at this point. What a mess. Can’t believe they released those maps in the PowerPoint slides and then gave us this mess instead.

Wait... what?

They are moving Sangster students from Sangster and Lake Braddock to Newington Forest and South County.

Why would they turn around and move kids from a third, farther away elementary school back into those Sangster spots?

Look at the north-westernmost part of Silverbrook’s boundary on these maps and there is a change. It’s the streets off Silverbrook closer to 123 - Oak Hollow, Oak Bridge etc.

123 to Sangster makes zero sense, and is not included on the maps.

Can you cite a page number and package date?

[Anonymous]

Looks like Ladybank and Stone Heather in Herndon are indeed moving from Chantilly to Oakton HS

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually it looks like they’re trying to move students out of Silverbrook to Sangster and Lake Braddock. Is anyone else seeing this?. Neither of those schools needs to gain or lose students at this point. What a mess. Can’t believe they released those maps in the PowerPoint slides and then gave us this mess instead.

Wait... what?

They are moving Sangster students from Sangster and Lake Braddock to Newington Forest and South County.

Why would they turn around and move kids from a third, farther away elementary school back into those Sangster spots?

Look at the north-westernmost part of Silverbrook’s boundary on these maps and there is a change. It’s the streets off Silverbrook closer to 123 - Oak Hollow, Oak Bridge etc.

123 to Sangster makes zero sense, and is not included on the maps.

Can you cite a page number and package date?

It’s on the new map tool seemingly, on all 3 scenarios. Look at the little almost square piece directly under South Run Park. It seems like they’re trying to move that from Silverbrook/SC to Sangster/LB or am I reading it wrong? That was never in any of the scenarios but maybe they thought with Sangster losing that attendance island that they needed more kids?

This surprises me because without Hagel Cir., Halley ES - which literally shares a neighborhood with Silverbrook and you could drive or walk between the two schools on only neighborhood streets/not 123 or busier roads - will sit well under capacity and could absorb a few streets from Silverbrook if needed. Silverbrook was at one point, quite over capacity - not sure if it still is.