FCPS Boundary Review Updates

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.


No. THIS process is not necessary. From where I sit, this is not improving things at all.

I still don't see where they are addressing the immediate and serious need for Coates, and maybe others, that need attention now.


Coates and park lawn boundary changes were delayed for the comprehensive boundary review. They delayed making changes to address actual needs at those schools to allow themselves to make unnecessary changes.

You can’t make this stuff up. Rank incompetence.


That is looking at something strategically and for a longer term rather than just fixing a pocket of need.


Except they are only using old enrollment numbers for September 2024, and are NOT looking at enrollment of the 5th through 10th graders, who will be the middle and high school students in fall 2026 when rezoning is implemented.

The only membership numbers that THRU should be using to determine if schools are too overcrowded over the next 5 year cycle (fall 2026- spring 2031) are the enrollment numbers for current 1st-6th grade for middle school rezoning, and the current 5th grade-10th grade rezoning for high school.

Any enrollment numbers that include current juniors and seniors are completely flawed, as those large classes will be long gone when rezoning is implemented. Thru should only use the membersip numbers for grades below class of 2026.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

What is interesting about Emerald Chase is that they are trying to use the process to move the boundary for the HS that they want, which isn't the move suggested or the current location. The problem is they want to move to one of the overcrowded HS and I don't see that happening. I think that bit of politicking is hurting them, but I get it. If FCPS is changing the boundaries, why not try and move to the HS that you are most interested in?



I think there are parents who have been fighting long before the boundary review process to have the high school changed to Chantilly. It's the closest to our neighborhood by far and that's where most of the kids from elementary school go. So it's my impression that it's not that this process came up and people saw an opportunity -- this has been an ongoing effort.


There’s a group of parents at Vienna ES doing something similar to try and get moved from Marshall to Madison. About 7% of Vienna ES feeds to Kilmer/Marshall and Thru is proposing to eliminate the split feeder and send them to Freedom Hill ES, which feeds 100% to Kilmer/Marshall. The parents are asking to stay at Vienna ES but get moved to Thoreau/Madison. It’s been on their radar for years and now they see an opportunity.

Cleaning up Vienna and Cunningham Park to make them straight Madison feeders makes a hell of a lot more sense then whatever they’re trying to do to pick up more Madison kids from Westbriar.


Why can’t they make Westbriar feed entirely to Marshall? If that means some Town of Vienna families go to Marshall, so be it.

I agree. A very small portion of TOV goes to Westbriar. It’s mostly the country club that falls within that region. If TOV feels strongly enough to have all of TOV attend Madison, they should look into moving the TOV parts of Westbriar to Vienna ES and Wolftrap.


It’s not the TOV’s decision at all, but FCPS seems to be bending over backwards to make Westbriar a more even split feeder between Madison and Marshall. It would make more sense to have all of Westbriar go to Marshall and all of Vienna and Cunningham Park go to Madison. Make whatever other adjustments are needed to ensure Kilmer and Marshall have enough kids. They don’t need to empty out Marshall now to justify an expansion Madison didn’t need.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I do think this process is necessary. We almost certainly won’t be affected (other than my kids losing friends,) but we went through a recent smaller boundary thing and I was still on board even if it meant a non-preferred solution for us.

The county isn’t doing everything well, but they need to be able adjust things to improve the overall logistics of the county.


No. THIS process is not necessary. From where I sit, this is not improving things at all.

I still don't see where they are addressing the immediate and serious need for Coates, and maybe others, that need attention now.


Coates and park lawn boundary changes were delayed for the comprehensive boundary review. They delayed making changes to address actual needs at those schools to allow themselves to make unnecessary changes.

You can’t make this stuff up. Rank incompetence.


That is looking at something strategically and for a longer term rather than just fixing a pocket of need.


Except they are only using old enrollment numbers for September 2024, and are NOT looking at enrollment of the 5th through 10th graders, who will be the middle and high school students in fall 2026 when rezoning is implemented.

The only membership numbers that THRU should be using to determine if schools are too overcrowded over the next 5 year cycle (fall 2026- spring 2031) are the enrollment numbers for current 1st-6th grade for middle school rezoning, and the current 5th grade-10th grade rezoning for high school.

Any enrollment numbers that include current juniors and seniors are completely flawed, as those large classes will be long gone when rezoning is implemented. Thru should only use the membersip numbers for grades below class of 2026.

In the boundary review tool, click Comment. Click an area within WSHS (an area in HVES slated for South County) and select Scenario 1. Pick the joyously happy face. Select HS. Describe why capacity doesn’t need to be balanced based on declining enrollment numbers.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:

What is interesting about Emerald Chase is that they are trying to use the process to move the boundary for the HS that they want, which isn't the move suggested or the current location. The problem is they want to move to one of the overcrowded HS and I don't see that happening. I think that bit of politicking is hurting them, but I get it. If FCPS is changing the boundaries, why not try and move to the HS that you are most interested in?



I think there are parents who have been fighting long before the boundary review process to have the high school changed to Chantilly. It's the closest to our neighborhood by far and that's where most of the kids from elementary school go. So it's my impression that it's not that this process came up and people saw an opportunity -- this has been an ongoing effort.


There’s a group of parents at Vienna ES doing something similar to try and get moved from Marshall to Madison. About 7% of Vienna ES feeds to Kilmer/Marshall and Thru is proposing to eliminate the split feeder and send them to Freedom Hill ES, which feeds 100% to Kilmer/Marshall. The parents are asking to stay at Vienna ES but get moved to Thoreau/Madison. It’s been on their radar for years and now they see an opportunity.

Cleaning up Vienna and Cunningham Park to make them straight Madison feeders makes a hell of a lot more sense then whatever they’re trying to do to pick up more Madison kids from Westbriar.


Why can’t they make Westbriar feed entirely to Marshall? If that means some Town of Vienna families go to Marshall, so be it.

I agree. A very small portion of TOV goes to Westbriar. It’s mostly the country club that falls within that region. If TOV feels strongly enough to have all of TOV attend Madison, they should look into moving the TOV parts of Westbriar to Vienna ES and Wolftrap.


It’s not the TOV’s decision at all, but FCPS seems to be bending over backwards to make Westbriar a more even split feeder between Madison and Marshall. It would make more sense to have all of Westbriar go to Marshall and all of Vienna and Cunningham Park go to Madison. Make whatever other adjustments are needed to ensure Kilmer and Marshall have enough kids. They don’t need to empty out Marshall now to justify an expansion Madison didn’t need.

Both BRAC members for Marshall came from Westbriar, so it isn’t shocking that the feeder patterns directly surrounding Thoreau didn’t get much attention. It’s easier to advocate for an area you’re familiar with.
Anonymous
If you use the current membership numbers, our high school enrollment drops by over 160 students by Fall 2026 when rezoning is implemented, using the actual membership numbers for the schools, to just over 2600 students from over 2700 students.

The CIP projections have it growing by roughly 200 students in that same time period, to nearly 3000 students. How is FCPS coming up with a nearly 400 student difference in enrollment? Were the numbers just pulled out of the air to justify rezoning?

Even if all 50-60 of the AAP kids return to the high school along with an unusually large amount of Catholic school students and military kids/new students registering, the high school enrollment should still be smaller based on FCPS own membership nimbers. Where are those estimated extra hundreds of students used to justify rezoning coming from?
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:lol - just noticed that the Emerald Chase HOA website moved their instructions on how to manipulate the system behind a username/password login now.


That's not what happened. That part of the site is down completely now because there are different opinions in the neighborhood about the high school getting rezoned. There are people here who want to stay at Westfields, or are happy with a change to South Lakes, or want a change to Chantilly--and some who would be fine with any of those options, they just don't want the elementary school to change. Pretty sure most people want grandfathering no matter what.

Neighbors have been urging others not to comment and upvote on Emerald Chase-specific issues on Pigeonhole at community meetings that seem outside our "area." Nobody wanted to make it so that others here felt they couldn't get their voices heard, and everyone I've talked to feels really bad about it.


I suspect that this is representative of what FCPS really looks like. People feel strongly on all sides of the issue but that the ones who are ok with change feel like they are getting shouted down by the ones really passionate about not changing. If you are ok with change, you tend to be ok with the status quo so there is no point in being super vocal.

What is interesting about Emerald Chase is that they are trying to use the process to move the boundary for the HS that they want, which isn't the move suggested or the current location. The problem is they want to move to one of the overcrowded HS and I don't see that happening. I think that bit of politicking is hurting them, but I get it. If FCPS is changing the boundaries, why not try and move to the HS that you are most interested in?

I would love to see what Thru would project if they only focused on getting the schools above 100% to 99%. Remove the split feeder and islands, most of the families at the split feeders and islands seem to prefer their current location to where they would be moved and just address the overcrowding. Those maps would look really different and would probably engender unhappy families who don't want to move but it would be far easier to make the case for moving. I think it might actually address some of the split feed and islands as well.



What a load of bull crap. The losing side will always pretend that they have the silent majority. But as much as you claim there are proponents who are drowned out, there are many opponents who believe that the school board is not going to listen to them.

So frankly, your post is just sour grapes. People do not want their kids moved, much as you wish it were the opposite. See the community feedback that has been posted - unless I’m missing an objective poll of the county where families indicated they want mass disruption in the county schools? Didn’t think so.


My kid was at a school that wasn't likely to be moved, we didn't win or lose anything. His old ES is scheduled to pick up kids, the school has space, and it will be find picking up students. The feedback on this site is biased because even posting a neutral post is seen as being supportive of boundary change and someone attacks the post within minutes. There is zero point in posting that you are fine if your kid is moved because someone jumps in and attacks you.

No one thinks people want their kids to move, most people are happy with where they are. But there are people who understand why kids might be moved and will be ok with it, especially if their kids are moving to an equivalent school. I fully understand why parents would not want to move from an AP school to an IB school or why parents would not want to move from a highly rated school to a poorly rated school. I don't think kids should be moved to adjust FARMs rate and would oppose that. But kids need to be moved from schools like Coates and Parklawn that are overcrowded. It sounds like Chantilly, Centerville, and WSHS are at the tail end of their population surges and will no longer be overcrowded by the time that the boundary changes take place so there probably isn't a need.







Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:lol - just noticed that the Emerald Chase HOA website moved their instructions on how to manipulate the system behind a username/password login now.


That's not what happened. That part of the site is down completely now because there are different opinions in the neighborhood about the high school getting rezoned. There are people here who want to stay at Westfields, or are happy with a change to South Lakes, or want a change to Chantilly--and some who would be fine with any of those options, they just don't want the elementary school to change. Pretty sure most people want grandfathering no matter what.

Neighbors have been urging others not to comment and upvote on Emerald Chase-specific issues on Pigeonhole at community meetings that seem outside our "area." Nobody wanted to make it so that others here felt they couldn't get their voices heard, and everyone I've talked to feels really bad about it.


I suspect that this is representative of what FCPS really looks like. People feel strongly on all sides of the issue but that the ones who are ok with change feel like they are getting shouted down by the ones really passionate about not changing. If you are ok with change, you tend to be ok with the status quo so there is no point in being super vocal.

What is interesting about Emerald Chase is that they are trying to use the process to move the boundary for the HS that they want, which isn't the move suggested or the current location. The problem is they want to move to one of the overcrowded HS and I don't see that happening. I think that bit of politicking is hurting them, but I get it. If FCPS is changing the boundaries, why not try and move to the HS that you are most interested in?

I would love to see what Thru would project if they only focused on getting the schools above 100% to 99%. Remove the split feeder and islands, most of the families at the split feeders and islands seem to prefer their current location to where they would be moved and just address the overcrowding. Those maps would look really different and would probably engender unhappy families who don't want to move but it would be far easier to make the case for moving. I think it might actually address some of the split feed and islands as well.



What a load of bull crap. The losing side will always pretend that they have the silent majority. But as much as you claim there are proponents who are drowned out, there are many opponents who believe that the school board is not going to listen to them.

So frankly, your post is just sour grapes. People do not want their kids moved, much as you wish it were the opposite. See the community feedback that has been posted - unless I’m missing an objective poll of the county where families indicated they want mass disruption in the county schools? Didn’t think so.


My kid was at a school that wasn't likely to be moved, we didn't win or lose anything. His old ES is scheduled to pick up kids, the school has space, and it will be find picking up students. The feedback on this site is biased because even posting a neutral post is seen as being supportive of boundary change and someone attacks the post within minutes. There is zero point in posting that you are fine if your kid is moved because someone jumps in and attacks you.

No one thinks people want their kids to move, most people are happy with where they are. But there are people who understand why kids might be moved and will be ok with it, especially if their kids are moving to an equivalent school. I fully understand why parents would not want to move from an AP school to an IB school or why parents would not want to move from a highly rated school to a poorly rated school. I don't think kids should be moved to adjust FARMs rate and would oppose that. But kids need to be moved from schools like Coates and Parklawn that are overcrowded. It sounds like Chantilly, Centerville, and WSHS are at the tail end of their population surges and will no longer be overcrowded by the time that the boundary changes take place so there probably isn't a need.



Again for those in the back. Coated capacity changes have been delayed at least a year so that FCPS can push through this comprehensive review. Sniveling Sandy wouldn’t have it any other way. Especially when it comes to eventually grandfathering your kids - can’t have that because then we can’t make even more unnecessary changes.

Incompetence on full display to the county.
Anonymous
I walked it yesterday. 240 steps from my front door to entrance 3 at Marshall, but sure, bring another bus into an already congested area at 7:30am to bus these kids to McLean.


Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Lets talk Timberlane. Is there any realistic chance it stays with McLean? Or gets transitioned into Marshall? Or is it ultimately bound for Falls Church High School?


I will give you my perspective, and it's mine only.

Timber Lane has been bouncing around in the Thru proposals. It's caught in the crossfire for two reasons: (1) it's an attendance island now at Longfellow/McLean and (2) Graham Road ES currently lies within the Timber Lane boundary south of Route 29.

The BRAC slides had them both keeping Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean, except for the area off Route 29 west of Hollywood Road, which they were proposing to move to Kilmer but keep at McLean. And then they had Timber Lane south of Route 29 moving to Longfellow but not McLean. The proposals required them to move part of Shrevewood from Marshall to McLean to bridge the island.

The proposals in the tool deal with some of the obvious flaws. They don't have kids going to Kilmer and then McLean any longer, or kids going to Longfellow and then Falls Church. By any reasonable measure, those are improvements. But they now propose to move all of Timber Lane north of Route 29 to Jackson/Falls Church, except for the area west of Hollywood Road, which they'd continue to move to Kilmer, but then also move to Marshall rather than keep it at McLean.

... This alternative would not take advantage of the additional seats at Falls Church, but they aren't proposing to do anything to move kids into expanded Herndon right now, either. So it's not like they have a consistent approach to making sure they are doing something at every high school that's been expanded recently to take advantage of additional seats.

TLDR version - sure, everything is going to remain in play for months, and it's possible they could revert to keeping most of Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean or entertain requests to move to Kilmer/Marshall instead. Area west of Hollywood Road is likely to move to Shrevewood since they've boxed themselves into making other changes to Timber Lane's boundaries south of Route 29 that will increase Timber Lane's enrollment.


A PP poster wrote that 38% of Spring Hill is now the island. Now it has about 10 legal description sites as seen on the Mclean/Langley boundary process. New builds prior commercial zoning. Nobody looked at this stuff.

Decrease in membership over 20 years without significant boundary changes [Middleton and Blueberry Hill to CRES were small adds from Westbriar Island to Colvin Run]:

VDOE 2004-2005 difference from 2024-2025:
Forestville + Great Falls + Colvin Run (401) - new SFH+empty nesters+ some SINKS/DINKS
Spring Hill Elementary 207 - projected at 105% capacity CIPSY29-30

We attempted to reconcile Thru slides to current :
Falls Church: slides 0 + tool 190=190 is larger than what appears to be Timber Lane Island
Mclean: slides -142 + tool - 205 = diff -63 extra out of Mclean is Timber Lane Island?


Somebody needs to take a video of the walk to Marshall from Dominion Way to George C Marshall Drive. A bus to Mclean HS? No way. Another video to display is the walk to Westgate. Any other gems needed?










Anonymous
Coated capacity changes



???

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Coated capacity changes



???


I assume they meant Coates ES.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:I walked it yesterday. 240 steps from my front door to entrance 3 at Marshall, but sure, bring another bus into an already congested area at 7:30am to bus these kids to McLean.


Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Lets talk Timberlane. Is there any realistic chance it stays with McLean? Or gets transitioned into Marshall? Or is it ultimately bound for Falls Church High School?


I will give you my perspective, and it's mine only.

Timber Lane has been bouncing around in the Thru proposals. It's caught in the crossfire for two reasons: (1) it's an attendance island now at Longfellow/McLean and (2) Graham Road ES currently lies within the Timber Lane boundary south of Route 29.

The BRAC slides had them both keeping Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean, except for the area off Route 29 west of Hollywood Road, which they were proposing to move to Kilmer but keep at McLean. And then they had Timber Lane south of Route 29 moving to Longfellow but not McLean. The proposals required them to move part of Shrevewood from Marshall to McLean to bridge the island.

The proposals in the tool deal with some of the obvious flaws. They don't have kids going to Kilmer and then McLean any longer, or kids going to Longfellow and then Falls Church. By any reasonable measure, those are improvements. But they now propose to move all of Timber Lane north of Route 29 to Jackson/Falls Church, except for the area west of Hollywood Road, which they'd continue to move to Kilmer, but then also move to Marshall rather than keep it at McLean.

... This alternative would not take advantage of the additional seats at Falls Church, but they aren't proposing to do anything to move kids into expanded Herndon right now, either. So it's not like they have a consistent approach to making sure they are doing something at every high school that's been expanded recently to take advantage of additional seats.

TLDR version - sure, everything is going to remain in play for months, and it's possible they could revert to keeping most of Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean or entertain requests to move to Kilmer/Marshall instead. Area west of Hollywood Road is likely to move to Shrevewood since they've boxed themselves into making other changes to Timber Lane's boundaries south of Route 29 that will increase Timber Lane's enrollment.


A PP poster wrote that 38% of Spring Hill is now the island. Now it has about 10 legal description sites as seen on the Mclean/Langley boundary process. New builds prior commercial zoning. Nobody looked at this stuff.

Decrease in membership over 20 years without significant boundary changes [Middleton and Blueberry Hill to CRES were small adds from Westbriar Island to Colvin Run]:

VDOE 2004-2005 difference from 2024-2025:
Forestville + Great Falls + Colvin Run (401) - new SFH+empty nesters+ some SINKS/DINKS
Spring Hill Elementary 207 - projected at 105% capacity CIPSY29-30

We attempted to reconcile Thru slides to current :
Falls Church: slides 0 + tool 190=190 is larger than what appears to be Timber Lane Island
Mclean: slides -142 + tool - 205 = diff -63 extra out of Mclean is Timber Lane Island?


Somebody needs to take a video of the walk to Marshall from Dominion Way to George C Marshall Drive. A bus to Mclean HS? No way. Another video to display is the walk to Westgate. Any other gems needed?












240 steps to Marshall entrance 3. Thank you! I am absolutely shocked at this incompetency. To be blunt this thng is at the point where the media should be contacted. Film crew out for the walk. Quick hop to Westgate and it would take the pros 30 minutes. But imagine the viewer count.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I walked it yesterday. 240 steps from my front door to entrance 3 at Marshall, but sure, bring another bus into an already congested area at 7:30am to bus these kids to McLean.


Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Lets talk Timberlane. Is there any realistic chance it stays with McLean? Or gets transitioned into Marshall? Or is it ultimately bound for Falls Church High School?


I will give you my perspective, and it's mine only.

Timber Lane has been bouncing around in the Thru proposals. It's caught in the crossfire for two reasons: (1) it's an attendance island now at Longfellow/McLean and (2) Graham Road ES currently lies within the Timber Lane boundary south of Route 29.

The BRAC slides had them both keeping Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean, except for the area off Route 29 west of Hollywood Road, which they were proposing to move to Kilmer but keep at McLean. And then they had Timber Lane south of Route 29 moving to Longfellow but not McLean. The proposals required them to move part of Shrevewood from Marshall to McLean to bridge the island.

The proposals in the tool deal with some of the obvious flaws. They don't have kids going to Kilmer and then McLean any longer, or kids going to Longfellow and then Falls Church. By any reasonable measure, those are improvements. But they now propose to move all of Timber Lane north of Route 29 to Jackson/Falls Church, except for the area west of Hollywood Road, which they'd continue to move to Kilmer, but then also move to Marshall rather than keep it at McLean.

... This alternative would not take advantage of the additional seats at Falls Church, but they aren't proposing to do anything to move kids into expanded Herndon right now, either. So it's not like they have a consistent approach to making sure they are doing something at every high school that's been expanded recently to take advantage of additional seats.

TLDR version - sure, everything is going to remain in play for months, and it's possible they could revert to keeping most of Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean or entertain requests to move to Kilmer/Marshall instead. Area west of Hollywood Road is likely to move to Shrevewood since they've boxed themselves into making other changes to Timber Lane's boundaries south of Route 29 that will increase Timber Lane's enrollment.


A PP poster wrote that 38% of Spring Hill is now the island. Now it has about 10 legal description sites as seen on the Mclean/Langley boundary process. New builds prior commercial zoning. Nobody looked at this stuff.

Decrease in membership over 20 years without significant boundary changes [Middleton and Blueberry Hill to CRES were small adds from Westbriar Island to Colvin Run]:

VDOE 2004-2005 difference from 2024-2025:
Forestville + Great Falls + Colvin Run (401) - new SFH+empty nesters+ some SINKS/DINKS
Spring Hill Elementary 207 - projected at 105% capacity CIPSY29-30

We attempted to reconcile Thru slides to current :
Falls Church: slides 0 + tool 190=190 is larger than what appears to be Timber Lane Island
Mclean: slides -142 + tool - 205 = diff -63 extra out of Mclean is Timber Lane Island?


Somebody needs to take a video of the walk to Marshall from Dominion Way to George C Marshall Drive. A bus to Mclean HS? No way. Another video to display is the walk to Westgate. Any other gems needed?












240 steps to Marshall entrance 3. Thank you! I am absolutely shocked at this incompetency. To be blunt this thng is at the point where the media should be contacted. Film crew out for the walk. Quick hop to Westgate and it would take the pros 30 minutes. But imagine the viewer count.

I’m shocked the Westgate proposal survived the post-BRAC draft. The Marshall one I can understand since they obviously slapped that part together very quickly after the decision was made to run the scenarios with Timber Lane at Falls Church.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Coated capacity changes



???


I assume they meant Coates ES.


Thanks, don't know why I didn't figure that out.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I walked it yesterday. 240 steps from my front door to entrance 3 at Marshall, but sure, bring another bus into an already congested area at 7:30am to bus these kids to McLean.


Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Lets talk Timberlane. Is there any realistic chance it stays with McLean? Or gets transitioned into Marshall? Or is it ultimately bound for Falls Church High School?


I will give you my perspective, and it's mine only.

Timber Lane has been bouncing around in the Thru proposals. It's caught in the crossfire for two reasons: (1) it's an attendance island now at Longfellow/McLean and (2) Graham Road ES currently lies within the Timber Lane boundary south of Route 29.

The BRAC slides had them both keeping Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean, except for the area off Route 29 west of Hollywood Road, which they were proposing to move to Kilmer but keep at McLean. And then they had Timber Lane south of Route 29 moving to Longfellow but not McLean. The proposals required them to move part of Shrevewood from Marshall to McLean to bridge the island.

The proposals in the tool deal with some of the obvious flaws. They don't have kids going to Kilmer and then McLean any longer, or kids going to Longfellow and then Falls Church. By any reasonable measure, those are improvements. But they now propose to move all of Timber Lane north of Route 29 to Jackson/Falls Church, except for the area west of Hollywood Road, which they'd continue to move to Kilmer, but then also move to Marshall rather than keep it at McLean.

... This alternative would not take advantage of the additional seats at Falls Church, but they aren't proposing to do anything to move kids into expanded Herndon right now, either. So it's not like they have a consistent approach to making sure they are doing something at every high school that's been expanded recently to take advantage of additional seats.

TLDR version - sure, everything is going to remain in play for months, and it's possible they could revert to keeping most of Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean or entertain requests to move to Kilmer/Marshall instead. Area west of Hollywood Road is likely to move to Shrevewood since they've boxed themselves into making other changes to Timber Lane's boundaries south of Route 29 that will increase Timber Lane's enrollment.


A PP poster wrote that 38% of Spring Hill is now the island. Now it has about 10 legal description sites as seen on the Mclean/Langley boundary process. New builds prior commercial zoning. Nobody looked at this stuff.

Decrease in membership over 20 years without significant boundary changes [Middleton and Blueberry Hill to CRES were small adds from Westbriar Island to Colvin Run]:

VDOE 2004-2005 difference from 2024-2025:
Forestville + Great Falls + Colvin Run (401) - new SFH+empty nesters+ some SINKS/DINKS
Spring Hill Elementary 207 - projected at 105% capacity CIPSY29-30

We attempted to reconcile Thru slides to current :
Falls Church: slides 0 + tool 190=190 is larger than what appears to be Timber Lane Island
Mclean: slides -142 + tool - 205 = diff -63 extra out of Mclean is Timber Lane Island?


Somebody needs to take a video of the walk to Marshall from Dominion Way to George C Marshall Drive. A bus to Mclean HS? No way. Another video to display is the walk to Westgate. Any other gems needed?












240 steps to Marshall entrance 3. Thank you! I am absolutely shocked at this incompetency. To be blunt this thng is at the point where the media should be contacted. Film crew out for the walk. Quick hop to Westgate and it would take the pros 30 minutes. But imagine the viewer count.

I’m shocked the Westgate proposal survived the post-BRAC draft. The Marshall one I can understand since they obviously slapped that part together very quickly after the decision was made to run the scenarios with Timber Lane at Falls Church.


I doubt Thru paid any attention to the fact that Frisch’s school in Dunn Loring is going to reshuffle the boundaries for many of the Marshall ES feeders in a few years. Best to leave that part of Lemon Road at Marshall and not worry about a split feeder for a few more years when it’s probably going to get moved later anyway.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I walked it yesterday. 240 steps from my front door to entrance 3 at Marshall, but sure, bring another bus into an already congested area at 7:30am to bus these kids to McLean.


Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Lets talk Timberlane. Is there any realistic chance it stays with McLean? Or gets transitioned into Marshall? Or is it ultimately bound for Falls Church High School?


I will give you my perspective, and it's mine only.

Timber Lane has been bouncing around in the Thru proposals. It's caught in the crossfire for two reasons: (1) it's an attendance island now at Longfellow/McLean and (2) Graham Road ES currently lies within the Timber Lane boundary south of Route 29.

The BRAC slides had them both keeping Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean, except for the area off Route 29 west of Hollywood Road, which they were proposing to move to Kilmer but keep at McLean. And then they had Timber Lane south of Route 29 moving to Longfellow but not McLean. The proposals required them to move part of Shrevewood from Marshall to McLean to bridge the island.

The proposals in the tool deal with some of the obvious flaws. They don't have kids going to Kilmer and then McLean any longer, or kids going to Longfellow and then Falls Church. By any reasonable measure, those are improvements. But they now propose to move all of Timber Lane north of Route 29 to Jackson/Falls Church, except for the area west of Hollywood Road, which they'd continue to move to Kilmer, but then also move to Marshall rather than keep it at McLean.

... This alternative would not take advantage of the additional seats at Falls Church, but they aren't proposing to do anything to move kids into expanded Herndon right now, either. So it's not like they have a consistent approach to making sure they are doing something at every high school that's been expanded recently to take advantage of additional seats.

TLDR version - sure, everything is going to remain in play for months, and it's possible they could revert to keeping most of Timber Lane north of Route 29 at Longfellow/McLean or entertain requests to move to Kilmer/Marshall instead. Area west of Hollywood Road is likely to move to Shrevewood since they've boxed themselves into making other changes to Timber Lane's boundaries south of Route 29 that will increase Timber Lane's enrollment.


A PP poster wrote that 38% of Spring Hill is now the island. Now it has about 10 legal description sites as seen on the Mclean/Langley boundary process. New builds prior commercial zoning. Nobody looked at this stuff.

Decrease in membership over 20 years without significant boundary changes [Middleton and Blueberry Hill to CRES were small adds from Westbriar Island to Colvin Run]:

VDOE 2004-2005 difference from 2024-2025:
Forestville + Great Falls + Colvin Run (401) - new SFH+empty nesters+ some SINKS/DINKS
Spring Hill Elementary 207 - projected at 105% capacity CIPSY29-30

We attempted to reconcile Thru slides to current :
Falls Church: slides 0 + tool 190=190 is larger than what appears to be Timber Lane Island
Mclean: slides -142 + tool - 205 = diff -63 extra out of Mclean is Timber Lane Island?


Somebody needs to take a video of the walk to Marshall from Dominion Way to George C Marshall Drive. A bus to Mclean HS? No way. Another video to display is the walk to Westgate. Any other gems needed?












240 steps to Marshall entrance 3. Thank you! I am absolutely shocked at this incompetency. To be blunt this thng is at the point where the media should be contacted. Film crew out for the walk. Quick hop to Westgate and it would take the pros 30 minutes. But imagine the viewer count.

I’m shocked the Westgate proposal survived the post-BRAC draft. The Marshall one I can understand since they obviously slapped that part together very quickly after the decision was made to run the scenarios with Timber Lane at Falls Church.


I doubt Thru paid any attention to the fact that Frisch’s school in Dunn Loring is going to reshuffle the boundaries for many of the Marshall ES feeders in a few years. Best to leave that part of Lemon Road at Marshall and not worry about a split feeder for a few more years when it’s probably going to get moved later anyway.


I like my news film crew out to film the walks. Maybe a nice stop at Falls Church HS to preview the new capacity that was omitted for BRAC and a final at the Mclean trailer park.
post reply Forum Index » Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS)
Message Quick Reply
Go to: