Any updates on Mclean/Langley possible redistricting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good points.

Facilities has also been underestimating Langley's enrollment for awhile and apparently has not included the new housing going up on 7 (zoned for Langley) in the current projections.

With the addition of McLean students to Langley, and the new housing development you mention, Langley will be at capacity before we know it. It’s not *that* under enrolled.

Then they can start adding trailers just like the rest of the HS.

Maybe you’re unaware, but prior to the renovation, Langley had trailers taking up half the parking lot. Been there, done that. Which is why they wisely expanded.

[Anonymous]

Langley’s enrollment has been flat and other areas in the county have seen far more growth. While the school was due for a renovation, building it out to accommodate 2350 kids - at a location that only has one entrance/exit and is in a corner of the county - probably wasn’t the best use of the county’s money. But it undoubtedly made some contractors happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Langley’s enrollment has been flat and other areas in the county have seen far more growth. While the school was due for a renovation, building it out to accommodate 2350 kids - at a location that only has one entrance/exit and is in a corner of the county - probably wasn’t the best use of the county’s money. But it undoubtedly made some contractors happy.

Contractors are doing very well with FCPS. Huge amounts of unnecessary money are being spent to make the high schools look like high tech college campuses instead of sensible renovations and necessary additions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Langley’s enrollment has been flat and other areas in the county have seen far more growth. While the school was due for a renovation, building it out to accommodate 2350 kids - at a location that only has one entrance/exit and is in a corner of the county - probably wasn’t the best use of the county’s money. But it undoubtedly made some contractors happy.

.

Making it bigger was the right thing to do. It is very close to Tysons were there will be significant growth and we need all the HS space we can get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good points.

Facilities has also been underestimating Langley's enrollment for awhile and apparently has not included the new housing going up on 7 (zoned for Langley) in the current projections.

With the addition of McLean students to Langley, and the new housing development you mention, Langley will be at capacity before we know it. It’s not *that* under enrolled.

Then they can start adding trailers just like the rest of the HS.

Maybe you’re unaware, but prior to the renovation, Langley had trailers taking up half the parking lot. Been there, done that. Which is why they wisely expanded.

Then they should be used to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley’s enrollment has been flat and other areas in the county have seen far more growth. While the school was due for a renovation, building it out to accommodate 2350 kids - at a location that only has one entrance/exit and is in a corner of the county - probably wasn’t the best use of the county’s money. But it undoubtedly made some contractors happy.

.

Making it bigger was the right thing to do. It is very close to Tysons were there will be significant growth and we need all the HS space we can get.

There are multiple schools closer to Tysons and experiencing more growth than Langley. Expanding Langley’s boundaries is completely misaligned with other FCPS priorities. So it was not the right thing to do, even if it may have been the easiest thing to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley’s enrollment has been flat and other areas in the county have seen far more growth. While the school was due for a renovation, building it out to accommodate 2350 kids - at a location that only has one entrance/exit and is in a corner of the county - probably wasn’t the best use of the county’s money. But it undoubtedly made some contractors happy.

.

Making it bigger was the right thing to do. It is very close to Tysons were there will be significant growth and we need all the HS space we can get.

There are multiple schools closer to Tysons and experiencing more growth than Langley. Expanding Langley’s boundaries is completely misaligned with other FCPS priorities. So it was not the right thing to do, even if it may have been the easiest thing to do.

Please, Tysons is closer than a large part of Langley’s district and it is close enough to Tysons to take the pressure of some of the other HS. Langley is one of the smallest HS in the entire county- so it also makes sense to increase its population so that it can offer more varied classes that other HS can with larger student populations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley’s enrollment has been flat and other areas in the county have seen far more growth. While the school was due for a renovation, building it out to accommodate 2350 kids - at a location that only has one entrance/exit and is in a corner of the county - probably wasn’t the best use of the county’s money. But it undoubtedly made some contractors happy.

.

Making it bigger was the right thing to do. It is very close to Tysons were there will be significant growth and we need all the HS space we can get.

There are multiple schools closer to Tysons and experiencing more growth than Langley. Expanding Langley’s boundaries is completely misaligned with other FCPS priorities. So it was not the right thing to do, even if it may have been the easiest thing to do.

Please, Tysons is closer than a large part of Langley’s district and it is close enough to Tysons to take the pressure of some of the other HS. Langley is one of the smallest HS in the entire county- so it also makes sense to increase every believes the its population so that it can offer more varied classes that other HS can with larger student populations.

Langley already has a much larger boundary than any other high or secondary school in FCPS. It has a larger enrollment than Lee and TJ, and area residents have suggested that its enrollment will increase soon due to neighborhood turnover and new developments. While a modest expansion may have been prudent to accommodate that potential increase in enrollment, decimating other schools with smaller catchment areas that are closer to students’ homes is a bad idea. There may be a handful of kids now zoned for McLean who live closer to Langley, but expanding Langley’s boundaries to make the county’s wealthiest high school even richer is also problematic.

The bottom line is that FCPS has dug a hole for itself by adding too many seats in the wrong location and not enough seats in the right locations. They were not transparent about their plans, and they have created at least as many problems as they have solved.

[Anonymous]

I wonder if the poster who thinks it’s a good idea to move kids to Langley will fight against moving the same neighborhoods to Cooper.

People in our neighborhood are upset to think we may get moved to Langley, but not Cooper. Then our kids will end up the 5% of Longfellow that doesn’t get to attend McLean. I guess we’ll be the sacrificial lambs to justify Langley’s big expansion. Sorry, but it sucks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the poster who thinks it’s a good idea to move kids to Langley will fight against moving the same neighborhoods to Cooper.

People in our neighborhood are upset to think we may get moved to Langley, but not Cooper. Then our kids will end up the 5% of Longfellow that doesn’t get to attend McLean. I guess we’ll be the sacrificial lambs to justify Langley’s big expansion. Sorry, but it sucks.

Make some noise at the next meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the poster who thinks it’s a good idea to move kids to Langley will fight against moving the same neighborhoods to Cooper.

People in our neighborhood are upset to think we may get moved to Langley, but not Cooper. Then our kids will end up the 5% of Longfellow that doesn’t get to attend McLean. I guess we’ll be the sacrificial lambs to justify Langley’s big expansion. Sorry, but it sucks.

Make some noise at the next meeting.

We asked about it in December. It was clear staff had been ordered to provide no information on the middle school plans.

It’s crazy that they pretend “family engagement” is a priority and then refuse to engage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if the poster who thinks it’s a good idea to move kids to Langley will fight against moving the same neighborhoods to Cooper.

People in our neighborhood are upset to think we may get moved to Langley, but not Cooper. Then our kids will end up the 5% of Longfellow that doesn’t get to attend McLean. I guess we’ll be the sacrificial lambs to justify Langley’s big expansion. Sorry, but it sucks.

Nope, Cooper and Langley should have the same cachement area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Langley’s enrollment has been flat and other areas in the county have seen far more growth. While the school was due for a renovation, building it out to accommodate 2350 kids - at a location that only has one entrance/exit and is in a corner of the county - probably wasn’t the best use of the county’s money. But it undoubtedly made some contractors happy.

.

Making it bigger was the right thing to do. It is very close to Tysons were there will be significant growth and we need all the HS space we can get.

There are multiple schools closer to Tysons and experiencing more growth than Langley. Expanding Langley’s boundaries is completely misaligned with other FCPS priorities. So it was not the right thing to do, even if it may have been the easiest thing to do.

Please, Tysons is closer than a large part of Langley’s district and it is close enough to Tysons to take the pressure of some of the other HS. Langley is one of the smallest HS in the entire county- so it also makes sense to increase every believes the its population so that it can offer more varied classes that other HS can with larger student populations.

Langley already has a much larger boundary than any other high or secondary school in FCPS. It has a larger enrollment than Lee and TJ, and area residents have suggested that its enrollment will increase soon due to neighborhood turnover and new developments. While a modest expansion may have been prudent to accommodate that potential increase in enrollment, decimating other schools with smaller catchment areas that are closer to students’ homes is a bad idea. There may be a handful of kids now zoned for McLean who live closer to Langley, but expanding Langley’s boundaries to make the county’s wealthiest high school even richer is also problematic.

The bottom line is that FCPS has dug a hole for itself by adding too many seats in the wrong location and not enough seats in the right locations. They were not transparent about their plans, and they have created at least as many problems as they have solved.

Very easy to decrease Langley's boundary AND increase its enrollment- at least in the long term- once the new western HS is built.

[Anonymous]

Someday.

[Anonymous]

Very easy to decrease Langley's boundary AND increase its enrollment- at least in the long term- once the new western HS is built.

The schools that need relief in western Fairfax are not the ones that would affect Langley. But, that would suit the SB's new busing plan. So, that is likely what they will do.