FCPS Boundary Review Updates

[Anonymous]

Don't live in that neighborhood, but the most overcrowded school in the county is Coates. Scenario #1 is no change. This makes absolutely no sense at all.

Looks to me like my own neighborhood schools have no change on scenario #1 as well.

Is this true throughout the county? Is this just a red herring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is this new map tool that you speak of?

[Anonymous]

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

I don't think it's truly 3 different scenarios. I think it's three layers of changes that compose the ONE big scenario Thru is proposing. Map 1 "fixes" attendance islands. Map 2 ADDS "fixing" small split feeders. Map 3 ADDS "fixing" capacity at schools outside the 60%-110% range.

Is that incorrect?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Where is this new map tool that you speak of?

2 pages back https://www.fcpsboundaryreview.org/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

I don't think it's truly 3 different scenarios. I think it's three layers of changes that compose the ONE big scenario Thru is proposing. Map 1 "fixes" attendance islands. Map 2 ADDS "fixing" small split feeders. Map 3 ADDS "fixing" capacity at schools outside the 60%-110% range.

Is that incorrect?

Kind of, but not totally.

Kind of odd that they'd leave a scenario with Coates way overcrowded. That kind of goes with what you are saying. But, I'm not sure about #2.

But, they are taking my neighborhood and splitting it in a ridiculous fashion only for high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just got this email because I'm registered for the Oakton meeting tonight. It sounds like you get to go and use the tool in person and talk to others at your table about it, but then the only feedback they take is from multiple choice Qs on an app? I have actual questions about the maps that have been released so far.

Meeting Format

Superintendent Dr. Michelle Reid will discuss FCPS’ mission, purpose of the comprehensive boundary review, and timeline.

A representative from Thru Consulting will talk about the boundary review process so far, introduce the three initial draft boundary scenarios, and demo the Boundary Explorer Tool.

Participants will divide into groups (in-person and on Zoom). They can then look up their address in the Boundary Explorer Tool, discover how the proposed draft scenarios might affect their school or neighborhood, and discuss the proposed boundary scenarios with their group... community boundary review meetings via Zoom, we highly recommend you use a laptop for the best experience instead of a mobile device.

Are better off taking a laptop if in person? So the Boundary Explorer Tool is a 1 address look up to see impacts like the FCPS Boundary Locator? Any insights on these? :

Westgate - 118 walkers to Franklin Sherman. 2 buses? FS program capacity is 418 so at 98%, 8 more students put it at 100%. 21 more it's the Thru/Reid magic 105%. Franklin Sherman now has 123 transferring into Kent Gardens- immersion + boundary process?

https://www.fcps.edu/sites/default/files/4-11-2025%20Superintendent%20Boundary%20Review%20Advisory%20Committee%20Presentation.pdf
Slide 30:
Cooper +107 = 101%
Kilmer -31 =115% . What elementary school is this? Westgate Spring Gate area is now pink on map to Longfellow/Mclean.
Longfellow -76 =88%. Spring Hill Island?
Slide 34 :
Jackson -89= 87%.
Kilmer -110 [+ 39 Jackson -149 Thoreau] = 108% on site with trailers + modular.
Longfellow +50 Jackson =97%
Thoreau +149 Kilmer=101%.

Thanks - doesn't sound like the meetings will offer better information.

If you have access to the "FCPS School Boundary Explorer," that's apparently what you need to look at now. The proposals relating to Langley are the same (only move is moving the Spring Hill island from McLean to Langley), but the proposals relating to McLean, Marshall, Madison, and Falls Church are all different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don't live in that neighborhood, but the most overcrowded school in the county is Coates. Scenario #1 is no change. This makes absolutely no sense at all.

Looks to me like my own neighborhood schools have no change on scenario #1 as well.

Is this true throughout the county? Is this just a red herring?

The reason there is no change for Coates under Scenario #1 is that Scenario #1 only deals with attendance islands or schools located outside their boundaries. Coates falls into neither of those categories.

They show changes under Scenario #2 that would take Coates down to 793 (110% capacity) and under Scenario #3 that would take Coates down to 688 (96%).

If you're not in Coates, it's also possible that your neighborhood schools could have no change under Scenario #1 but could have changes under #2 or #3.

[Anonymous]

Someone help me figure this out.. Looks like Marshall HS is losing kids to both Mclean HS and Madison HS... I see Marshall's enrollment go down from 97% to 85%

Mclean HS was already at capacity, and it is picking up a decent chunk of kids from Marshall HS -- I don't see where it is losing students. Yet, the numbers show Mclean HS is going down from 109% to 100%. What addresses are getting moved out of Mclean HS? Where is it reflected on the map?

[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?

Those people are just trolls trying to make those langley residents look bad. Ignore them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone help me figure this out.. Looks like Marshall HS is losing kids to both Mclean HS and Madison HS... I see Marshall's enrollment go down from 97% to 85%

Mclean HS was already at capacity, and it is picking up a decent chunk of kids from Marshall HS -- I don't see where it is losing students. Yet, the numbers show Mclean HS is going down from 109% to 100%. What addresses are getting moved out of Mclean HS? Where is it reflected on the map?

McLean is losing Spring Hill to Langley and Timber Lane to Falls Church/Marshall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone help me figure this out.. Looks like Marshall HS is losing kids to both Mclean HS and Madison HS... I see Marshall's enrollment go down from 97% to 85%

Mclean HS was already at capacity, and it is picking up a decent chunk of kids from Marshall HS -- I don't see where it is losing students. Yet, the numbers show Mclean HS is going down from 109% to 100%. What addresses are getting moved out of Mclean HS? Where is it reflected on the map?

Under the new online tool, McLean would, as under the 4/11 proposal, lose the Tysons attendance island to Langley. In addition, they would move the Timber Lane attendance island, which they were previously "bridging" to the rest of the McLean area, to Falls Church, and move an area that previously fed to Timber Lane/Longfellow/McLean to Shrevewood/Kilmer/Marshall. Those changes would be partially offset by moving Marshall kids from three areas to McLean: (1) the part of Tysons bounded by Dolley Madison, the Toll Road and 495 (Spring Gate Apartments); (2) the part of Lemon Road that currently feeds to Marshall rather than McLean (that includes the area that someone pointed out is next door to Marshall); and (3) the Falls Hill area.

From what I can tell, the additional changes were intended to align the boundaries of Kilmer and Marshall more closely. Everything they now have proposed at Kilmer would feed into Marshall, although part of Thoreau would also continue to feed to Marshall. It also looks like, in addition to proposing to move the Westbriar island to Wolftrap and keeping it at Kilmer/Marshall, they are proposing to move part of Westbriar from Kilmer/Marshall to Thoreau/Madison, apparently with the goal of making Westbriar a more even split feeder as between Madison and Marshall.

[Anonymous]

One thing the additional changes relating to McLean and Marshall do is start to use some of the additional capacity at Madison and Falls Church. The earlier proposals didn't move anyone into Madison or Falls Church.

[Anonymous]

Just as a pointer for those looking at the online tool, it helps to click on the "Existing" tab first so you can see the existing boundaries clearly, and then click on the tabs for each of the three scenarios.

[Anonymous]

They are moving some of Shrevewood that currently goes to Kilmer to Longfellow (creating a change) and taking out neighborhood that timber lane to Longfellow. Unclear what problem they are solving by changing more kids schools and friends. And creating a small Shrevewood split feeder.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are moving some of Shrevewood that currently goes to Kilmer to Longfellow (creating a change) and taking out neighborhood that timber lane to Longfellow. Unclear what problem they are solving by changing more kids schools and friends. And creating a small Shrevewood split feeder.

The Shrevewood split feeder is really odd. After all of their tinkering, Kilmer and Marshall are at 90% capacity, so there’s no reason to move it.