Anonymous
04/18/2014 15:27
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:It makes sense for some movement based on current numbers.
No question that there are current capacity issues, and to the extent that adjustments can be made to alleviate them, those conversations should occur. But it is pretty clear if you look at enrollment projections in the CIPs that FCPS has literally no ability to forecast enrollment increases in any competent fashion. To make recommendations based upon a 5-year projection that has no track record of reliability is irresponsible.
I agree with you. The McLean HS five-year projections keep skyrocketing. While I'd love to think it's because people are moving into a pyramid with a good reputation, it seems like maybe FCPS wants an excuse to move kids to Langley to justify the addition it plans to add as part of Langley's renovation. I'd rather see FCPS adding ES capacity that's needed now closer to Tysons and then build an addition to McLean later if it's really needed.
Anonymous
04/18/2014 09:43
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Anonymous wrote:Westgate is a tiny school, to start with.
Westbriar was as well. But the new standard is going to be the 1,000 kid educational processing center. Get used to it.
Anonymous
04/18/2014 01:10
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Westgate is a tiny school, to start with.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 23:30
Subject: Re:Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Westgate is also getting an addition in reaction to new building in Tysons. Spring Hill looks to be a little under capacity.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 22:53
Subject: Re:Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Anonymous wrote:Surprised to not see Greenbriarwest Elementary school on the proposals for Cluster 7 - especially the AAP population.
Greenbriar West is listed in another attachment as "AAP Center Realignment under consideration":
http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9J6Q9N67C702/$file/Attachment%20A%20-%20Current%20Enrollment%20%26%20Capital%20Solutions.pdf
Anonymous
04/17/2014 21:04
Subject: Re:Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote: The alleviation of overcrowding at Kilmer and Thoreau by sending Cooper kids back to McLean makes sense.
What's depressing is seeing a small neighborhood school like Westbriar, with a one street entrance, ballooning up to 900 kids in 5 years. Yes, it's now an AAP center, but making it the defacto Tysons school with such limited access and doubling it's size is going to make passage in and out of those neighborhoods via OCR a nightmare.
Lemon Road has similar issues on a smaller lot.
PP, here. True, though I'm less familiar with LR. Wonder how soon before they address the real need for at least one new elementary school in Tysons area.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 19:52
Subject: Re:Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Surprised to not see Greenbriarwest Elementary school on the proposals for Cluster 7 - especially the AAP population.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 19:44
Subject: Re:Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Anonymous wrote: The alleviation of overcrowding at Kilmer and Thoreau by sending Cooper kids back to McLean makes sense.
What's depressing is seeing a small neighborhood school like Westbriar, with a one street entrance, ballooning up to 900 kids in 5 years. Yes, it's now an AAP center, but making it the defacto Tysons school with such limited access and doubling it's size is going to make passage in and out of those neighborhoods via OCR a nightmare.
Lemon Road has similar issues on a smaller lot.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 17:21
Subject: Re:Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
The alleviation of overcrowding at Kilmer and Thoreau by sending Cooper kids back to McLean makes sense.
What's depressing is seeing a small neighborhood school like Westbriar, with a one street entrance, ballooning up to 900 kids in 5 years. Yes, it's now an AAP center, but making it the defacto Tysons school with such limited access and doubling it's size is going to make passage in and out of those neighborhoods via OCR a nightmare.
What's depressing is seeing a small neighborhood school like Westbriar, with a one street entrance, ballooning up to 900 kids in 5 years. Yes, it's now an AAP center, but making it the defacto Tysons school with such limited access and doubling it's size is going to make passage in and out of those neighborhoods via OCR a nightmare.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 12:36
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Anonymous wrote:It makes sense for some movement based on current numbers.
No question that there are current capacity issues, and to the extent that adjustments can be made to alleviate them, those conversations should occur. But it is pretty clear if you look at enrollment projections in the CIPs that FCPS has literally no ability to forecast enrollment increases in any competent fashion. To make recommendations based upon a 5-year projection that has no track record of reliability is irresponsible.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 11:22
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Anonymous wrote:Good lord, the enrollment projections have been adjusted - many pretty dramatically from the last CIP. Their projections have zero credibility, especially going out any more than a year. It is truly frightening that they will ask the school board to make multi-million dollar commitments based on projections that are so unreliably volatile.
It makes sense for some movement based on current numbers.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 11:01
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Good lord, the enrollment projections have been adjusted - many pretty dramatically from the last CIP. Their projections have zero credibility, especially going out any more than a year. It is truly frightening that they will ask the school board to make multi-million dollar commitments based on projections that are so unreliably volatile.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 10:27
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Anonymous wrote:Just saw this on BoardDocs -- Tuesday's (April 23) work session on Capital Improvement Program Prioritization:
http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=9J3KWJ4EC758
Facilities has posted several documents -- their boundary study recommendations are here:
http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9J7PKC5A2A41/$file/Attachment%20D%20-%20Boundary%20Study%20Recommendations.pdf
The recommendations are broken out by cluster and school.
For example in Cluster 1, there is mention of a possible AAP boundary change for Longfellow, Kilmer and Cooper ("Much of the overcrowding at Longfellow and Kilmer is due to Cooper AAP students. Moving these students back to Cooper will alleviate overcrowding.") and a boundary change for Langley and McLean ("The surplus space generated by the Langley renovation can be used to provide overcrowding relief for McLean.")
Looking at the boundary maps of Langley and McLean- two logical possibilities pop up. Anything west of 495 and south of Route 7 can go to Cooper/Langley and/or have Franklin Sherman stop being a split feeder and go entirely to Cooper/Langley. Then they can end the idiotic decision to bus Kent Gardens to Churchill Road and Franklin Sherman to Haycock and flip them.
Anonymous
04/17/2014 10:01
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
^^should say WEDNESDAY'S work session
Anonymous
04/17/2014 10:00
Subject: Changes in boundaries for schools (including AAP Centers) and Capital Improvement Program
Just saw this on BoardDocs -- Tuesday's (April 23) work session on Capital Improvement Program Prioritization:
http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=9J3KWJ4EC758
Facilities has posted several documents -- their boundary study recommendations are here:
http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9J7PKC5A2A41/$file/Attachment%20D%20-%20Boundary%20Study%20Recommendations.pdf
The recommendations are broken out by cluster and school.
For example in Cluster 1, there is mention of a possible AAP boundary change for Longfellow, Kilmer and Cooper ("Much of the overcrowding at Longfellow and Kilmer is due to Cooper AAP students. Moving these students back to Cooper will alleviate overcrowding.") and a boundary change for Langley and McLean ("The surplus space generated by the Langley renovation can be used to provide overcrowding relief for McLean.")
http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/goto?open&id=9J3KWJ4EC758
Facilities has posted several documents -- their boundary study recommendations are here:
http://www.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/9J7PKC5A2A41/$file/Attachment%20D%20-%20Boundary%20Study%20Recommendations.pdf
The recommendations are broken out by cluster and school.
For example in Cluster 1, there is mention of a possible AAP boundary change for Longfellow, Kilmer and Cooper ("Much of the overcrowding at Longfellow and Kilmer is due to Cooper AAP students. Moving these students back to Cooper will alleviate overcrowding.") and a boundary change for Langley and McLean ("The surplus space generated by the Langley renovation can be used to provide overcrowding relief for McLean.")