Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is all just ridiculously confusing and convoluted. Just end the split feeders.

You've gotta be awfully simple to find this straightforward change "confusing and convoluted".

About 1 week after FCPS presented options A,B,C, D came the TJ admissions changes. The revised and recommended option C does not include any impact for those changes. FCPS knows more will not be attending TJ so the new option C reduced the feed to Langley by -126? This makes zero sense unless more and expanded boundary scope changes are in the future.

Shouse Village, site of Colvin Run, went to Langley and decades ago fought Marshall so ended up at Mclean. Parts of Colvin Run could go to various other elementary and high school pyramids. Madison and South Lakes ? See the colored areas on the maps.

Anonymous wrote:This is all just ridiculously confusing and convoluted. Just end the split feeders.

You've gotta be awfully simple to find this straightforward change "confusing and convoluted".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So dumb that they didn't go with option B and move all the Colvin Run kids...would have eliminated both an attendance island and gotten rid of a split feeder...the focus on SFH versus adding expensive Tyson's apartments is stupid.

Langley won’t fall apart just because it finally has some mid-range condos like the Rotonda and some rental apartments. Most of the multi-family housing in Tysons would remain zoned to McLean and Marshall.

DP. No one cares about apartments/townhouses/SFHs. That’s not the issue, so you can stop pretending it is. The issue is drawing up convoluted boundaries, leaving split-feeders, and continuing to have small islands here and there - JUST so the SB (and other self-righteous scolds) can say, “Look! Equity!” Boundaries should be based on practical geography, not the social justice mission du jour.

If boundaries were based mostly on practical geography, Langley would have a smaller boundary area and enrollment than it has now. It’s in a corner of the county with many students who live closer to other schools.

^ 12 miles

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So dumb that they didn't go with option B and move all the Colvin Run kids...would have eliminated both an attendance island and gotten rid of a split feeder...the focus on SFH versus adding expensive Tyson's apartments is stupid.

Langley won’t fall apart just because it finally has some mid-range condos like the Rotonda and some rental apartments. Most of the multi-family housing in Tysons would remain zoned to McLean and Marshall.

DP. No one cares about apartments/townhouses/SFHs. That’s not the issue, so you can stop pretending it is. The issue is drawing up convoluted boundaries, leaving split-feeders, and continuing to have small islands here and there - JUST so the SB (and other self-righteous scolds) can say, “Look! Equity!” Boundaries should be based on practical geography, not the social justice mission du jour.

You should just stop whining about it here and write the School Board that One Fairfax is garbage, equity is nonsense, Langley needs to remain the only high school in FCPS with no apartments, and the parents who bought in the areas of Colvin Run and Spring Hill zoned to Longfellow/McLean had no idea their kids wouldn’t go to Cooper/Langley even though those areas have been zoned to Longfellow/McLean for over 35 years. Just make sure that you don’t mention that some kids already travel over 12 Mike’s to Langley when you’re stressing the need for “practical geography” to trump all other considerations.

Because otherwise all FCPS is doing here is trying to balance the enrollments at an overcrowded and an under-enrolled school in a manner that doesn’t gut McLean or overcrowd Cooper while giving some consideration to the housing mix at both schools.

Anonymous wrote:So dumb that they didn't go with option B and move all the Colvin Run kids...would have eliminated both an attendance island and gotten rid of a split feeder...the focus on SFH versus adding expensive Tyson's apartments is stupid.

+ a million

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So dumb that they didn't go with option B and move all the Colvin Run kids...would have eliminated both an attendance island and gotten rid of a split feeder...the focus on SFH versus adding expensive Tyson's apartments is stupid.

Langley won’t fall apart just because it finally has some mid-range condos like the Rotonda and some rental apartments. Most of the multi-family housing in Tysons would remain zoned to McLean and Marshall.

DP. No one cares about apartments/townhouses/SFHs. That’s not the issue, so you can stop pretending it is. The issue is drawing up convoluted boundaries, leaving split-feeders, and continuing to have small islands here and there - JUST so the SB (and other self-righteous scolds) can say, “Look! Equity!” Boundaries should be based on practical geography, not the social justice mission du jour.

Anonymous wrote:So dumb that they didn't go with option B and move all the Colvin Run kids...would have eliminated both an attendance island and gotten rid of a split feeder...the focus on SFH versus adding expensive Tyson's apartments is stupid.

Langley won’t fall apart just because it finally has some mid-range condos like the Rotonda and some rental apartments. Most of the multi-family housing in Tysons would remain zoned to McLean and Marshall.

Anonymous wrote:This is all just ridiculously confusing and convoluted. Just end the split feeders.

It’s not that complicated if you read through the staff presentation. Eliminating all the split feeders is not an option given the limitations FCPS subjected itself to when conducting the study.

So dumb that they didn't go with option B and move all the Colvin Run kids...would have eliminated both an attendance island and gotten rid of a split feeder...the focus on SFH versus adding expensive Tyson's apartments is stupid.

This is all just ridiculously confusing and convoluted. Just end the split feeders.

Anonymous wrote:So all of Spring Hill will go to Langley?

The link above looks the same as the last one - portion of Spring Hill reassigned to Langley, not all of Spring Hill.

The original Option C was to send all of Spring Hill to Langley (pp. 19-20).

The staff’s final recommendation is a modified Option C that keeps part of Spring Hill at Longfellow/McLean (pp. 9-10).

So all of Spring Hill will go to Langley?

The link above looks the same as the last one - portion of Spring Hill reassigned to Langley, not all of Spring Hill.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New boarddocs are up. Option C is recommended, so Spring Hill students no longer go to Longfellow or McLean.

Link please!

This is the final staff recommendation - a modified version of Option C.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/fairfax/Board.nsf/files/BXATRN7802F7/$file/Presentation%20-%20McLean%20Langley%20High%20School%20Boundary%20Study.pdf

Anonymous wrote:New boarddocs are up. Option C is recommended, so Spring Hill students no longer go to Longfellow or McLean.

Current option C means, my child stays Colvin Run, Longfellow and McLean. That would be great.