Due to overcrowding at South County Secondary School, school boundaries for Hayfield Secondary, Lake Braddock Secondary and South County Secondary Schools are once more in question. All affected communities are invited to two important town meetings -- one is this evening, Tuesday, October 10, and the next is on Wednesday, November 1, at 7:30 p.m., both at South County Secondary School's auditorium.
What’s happening to change it?
The Fairfax County School Board is reviewing at least two possible boundary scenarios: making a traditional boundary adjustment based on geography; or eliminating the middle school from South County Secondary and dividing the middle school population (projected at more than 1,000 students) between Hayfield Secondary and Lake Braddock Secondary Schools based on available seats at each school.
What are the desired outcomes?
- Hayfield Secondary School (HSS) should remain under capacity if boundaries are redrawn to allow for future growth. HSS was well over capacity for well over a decade!
- HSS should remain a balanced, diverse and desirable community school, with only elementary schools in the immediately surrounding neighborhoods feeding the school.
- Students should stay at HSS for all six years of middle and high school. Hayfield and Lake Braddock are secondary schools with carefully planned and separate spaces for middle school and high school populations. A large middle school population and a smaller high school population would be detrimental to the educational quality on both sides of the building.
- Transportation routes and bus ride time MUST be considered during the boundary-setting process.
- The school board MUST consider consequences from DoD’s Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process –– with a potential influx of 20,000 workers at Fort Belvoir over the next four years.
What about these town meetings?
Please plan to attend this evening's (Tuesday, October 10) meeting, and be sure to mark your calendar for the follow-up meeting on Wednesday, November 1. Each meeting begins at 7:30 p.m. in the auditorium of South County Secondary School, located at 8501 Silverbrook Rd., Lorton, VA 22079. The meetings will feature group discussions and breakout sessions so the school board can gather data and info from the affected communities. As parents, residents and voters, you are strongly encouraged to attend and prove to the school board that you have a vested interest in the educational needs of your children and the welfare of your community. That’s why it’s important to be there!
2,729 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 401 – 600 of 2729 Newer› Newest»9:57
I just look at the difference in the maps of option 2 and 3. My proposal which included leaving Mason Neck at SCSS and the West of 95 portion of Lorton station at SCSS would actually bring back less numbers then Options 2A and 2b.
Your proposal puts the more affluent portion of Lorton Station west of I 95 and the more affluent Mason Neck at SCSS, and sends the rest of Lorton Station to Hayfield. 2A and 2B put the southern portion of Lorton Station (near the Hagel Circle area) at SCSS, and Mason Neck at Hayfield. 2A and 2B are better for diversity.
If you have enough suport for your option, get it to at least 3 members and make it an official option. This would lead to one more town hall meeting for comment, but could be worth the trouble.
Ok I see that we all need Mr. 1:04 to come back and save the day. In light of the new Option 3 and the comments I have been reading I have come up with a solution. Lets call it the Compromise for All solution since I hate the word option and the time stamp of 1:04 just does not have any pizaaz. We can shorten that title to the "CA" proposal.
First a little background to understand my position with this proposal. To borrow a phrase from the Silverbrook community, OPTION 3 "IS NOT AN OPTION". I wonder if the Facilities office had a computer crash and lost options 2a and 2b, the only options that allowed a reasonable amount of room for growth in the Hayfield Boundry. It looks like someone is playing a joke with option 3 because that option takes the only secondary school of the three that is actually losing population over the years and does nothing to utilize it! Ok, ok I know I said it myself, this is politics so lets not muddle things with facts and actual figures. I understand the thought process behind option 3 and its phase one and two, in politics we call it, put off the tough decision for the next sucker that gets elected. Since I am running for School board (still waiting for the nomination from my fellow bloggers) I will keep with the fine tradition put forth in Option 3 of putting off the tough decision while at the same time massaging the numbers to make it more palatable to more of my future constituents. So here goes, get ready to be dazzled.
NUMBER 1
Option two "A" or "B" leaves room for future growth, projection errors, BRAC unknowns, and any posible small scale invasion of martians with kids. 90-93 percent capacity at Hayfield will ensure that this School remains a good learning environment after more then 10 years of over crowding before SCSS was built. Take the boundaries in option 2 for Hayfield and make it now and forever Hayfield's boundary and do not in the future drag the Hayfield community into another study.
NUMBER 2 (the dazzling part)
The Lake Braddock community insist the the projections by the Facilities office and the hired Consultants are wrong. They also insist that even if those projections are wrong the capacity numbers reported by Facilities could not possible be correct. Facilities gets the capacity numbers from the architect. I wonder where the Lake Braddock folks get their numbers. But I digress, again I should not little silly little things like capicity numbers get in the way of good ole politics, so in that vain my proposal will also throw LBSS a bone and show a continued DECREASE IN POPULATION at LBSS to the out year 2012. In order to show some relief to SCSS the difference in the numbers going to Hayfield in options two and option three should be sent to LBSS. Those numbers are 154 next year and 164 by 2012 (if needed-to be explained later). But these are not just any numbers they are only middle school kids from the areas split off in options 2 A or B(someone else decide!) and sent to LBSS to come back for the 9th Grade to SCSS. I know its not great but it is better then doing bouncing all 517 middle school age kids back and forth. Of course the original option 1 that had all the Middle School kids leaving to LBSS included the entire western portion of the SCSS boundary. 154 middle schoolers moving is 113 less then option 1 and they would stay at SCSS for all 6 years. Where that would put the line someone would have to figure out, I just come up with the ideas here. So with those numbers LBSS would have a population of 3,918 next year and 3,486 in the out year 2012 at a capacity of 85.5 percent. Not bad if I do say so myself. Of course if I were a little more agressive I could tweak LBSS numbers up to 90% but that would mean the middle school at LBSS would be much larger as compared to the high school.
Number 3-(what about SCSS?)
Recognizing a brilliant political plan when I see one I have decided to adopt Phase one and two from Facilities' option 3. After #1 and #2 of my Compromise for All (CA) plan SCSS will be left with the same numbers as option 3. 113 percent over capacity. The same phase 1 and phase 2 would be in place however with my plan noone that moved from the SCSS area to Hayfield would be sent back to SCSS in the event that a middle school is built. Of course if a middle school is built the area of middle school kids sent to LBSS could be welcomed back to a new cosy school. If no middle school is magically found then let the fireworks begin, except this time it would be along the western front. Hayfield will be at a comfortable capacity and who knows maybe even at capacity if more martians show up. At that point in 2008 someone from SCSS would have to utilized the space at LBSS but don't worry, that is two years off.
Thanks for your attention.
Remember support the CA plan!
So this is Option 2 in the South and Option 1 in the north, but with phase II from Option 3? Can you tell me how the blue line in hockey works?
Ah remember we are only doing 154 kids of option one.
I thought they took the blue line out.
The SC community already sends 7th and 8th grade kids to LBSS for GT so another 100-150 from Silverbrook or NF should not be that big of a deal. It is only for a few years until the new Lorton Middle School is built.
The CA plan has the added brilliance of allowing some SCSS families to experience LBSS. Who knows? They might find that they like the purple shirts. Since SCSS GT kids already go to Lake Braddock for middle school, this would be a way to keep neighborhood kids together. AND if you follow this further, if you allow open pupil placement to LBSS for h.s. school students in this area (because you would already be busing m.s. students), it would keep families who want to be at LB at LB and families who really insist on SC could have their kids return there.
I really like the idea of ending this discussion for Hayfield once and for all, and the option 2 boundaries are clearly better for Hayfield.
I love the CA plan! I especially love the way you figured out the phase in to LBSS (absent the miracle middleschool) coincides with a new schoolboard term!
Guess that would be the year the Lady from Crosspoint gets elected and would have to make the decision?
Ah haa. Couldnt see THAT ONE comin.
Just be careful with the area that goes to LB for MS. If you go back to the 104 plan there was a portion of Silverbrook that would work well. I'm not sure of the numbers, but we can always change the capacity at LB to fit the situation.
How will the boundaries of Laurel Hill ES work into this plan? Will the portion of LS that is SC be able to split off to LH and keep LS from being a split feeder? We could then bring LS into the HF pyramid and bring them up as little Hawks.
Wow the comments just make the CA plan better then I imagined. Now if I could only come up with a plan for a free Middle School.
7:37, I would assume that the area of Lorton Station now west of I-95 would probably be redistricted to Laurel Hill or possibly to Halley. As I see it Lorton Station is overcrowed as is Silverbrook. I have no idea how the numbers work out but if Halley is undercapacity and "Lorton Valley" is just south of Halley, it maybe that area could be sent to Halley. If you look at a map you could actually eliminate that whole Hagel circle island situation and take the Halley boundry staight down through Lorton valley to Halley Circle. Hmm. the more I do this the easier it gets. Who needs town meetings when you have me around, thank you very much.
So yes to get back to your question Lortons station would then be reunited as one little Hawk family forever and ever. As it should be because once your a Hawk you are always a Hawk. Kind of like the Jets in West Side story.
Ahhhh great now I won't be able to get that song out of my head all night!
104 What happens to Mason Neck? Do they go to LH ES when it is built?
Not unless the SB lets Mason Neck schoolbuses drive right past Gunston ES on the way to Laurel Hill.
Heard that Tessie Wilson doesn't want to see LBSS as UC as Option 3 projects.
Then we need to sell the CA plan to her. Taking 150 kids is a decent compromise -- especially if they can send them back to SC after two years -- and permanently once the CA Middle School is built. She will not be re-elected if she allows LBSS to take on very many.
9:16,
Mason Neck belongs to the Gunston Elementary School. The Eagles and Hawks will be all reunited once again, unless the fine folks of Mason neck can somehow get back into the good graces of the the SCSS core communities. I would be happy for them to go to South County for a shorter bus trip but would also be happy to welcome them back into the Hawks nest.
hello
Ah it is back up and working.
Saratoga really wants to come to HF. The CA plan will cut them out forever.
Are you a Saratoga resident? Do you speak for the community? I am a Saratoga resident, I think Hayfield is a great school, but I want my kids to go to Lee. CA is fine by me.
1:04 here,
Saratoga was an idea whose time has come and past for Hayfield, as much a I personally would like to see this community join our fine nest, it is no longer on the radar of the school board or anyone else for that matter. I feel your love for Hayfield, however I'm afraid your destined to be a Lancer now and into the future.
CA is good as long as Lake Braddock has to take their fair share of SC students.
11:13
If you look at it from the view of the Lake Braddock community, they will tell you that the fair share of students for LBSS is none, the are full, no room at the inn, and they would tell the school board to send the extra to the manger also known as Hayfield. But we now have a STAR to follow that will lead us out of this mess a STAR that many would consider a SAVIOR from wretched world of over crowed schools. That star is the CA PLAN! A Compromise for ALL plan which leads us down a path of fair or no fair(kind of like deal or no deal) to be determined in 2008 between the Bruins and the Stallions only, because if this CA plan were adopted by the School Board, the Hawks would have flown the coop by 2008 as we will have been saved forever from the clutchs of evil, the evil of another town meeting.
Can I get an Amen!
Sincerely 1:04
Chapter 8 Verse 9
The CA plan needs to put the lower-income portions of Lorton Station at SCSS, and the more affluent Mason Neck at Hayfield to share diversity. No Amens.
2B!
9:47
Take a second look at the CA plan. It basically is option 2 but for the Hayfield Boundary, option 1 for 154 middle school kids in the Lake Braddock area, and includes the open question of phase one and two of option 3.
If your up on all this you will understand. If not, give me your phone number and I will explain, but it will take about an hour.
Economic diversity is important, but it is not worth forcing uncessary long bus rides and excess split feeders to make minor improvesments to it.
If Hayfield stays at 90-93% capacity, they will be content. Option #3 overcrowds Hayfield and sends and inordinate # of FRL/ESOL.
That is bad all around for HF, but it sets up the future of SCSS real nice.
We have to come up with a solution that is good for all 3 schools. Why would any secondary school want to take ms'ers only?
9:58
And your solution for all?
I agree that LBSS should not want to take Middle Schoolers only. However, they already do that as part of the GT program. They (and the SCSS crowd) fought to get that program into their school, so it appears they are not as concerned with the issues associated with the MS option (other than OC) as HF is concerned. They already have the bus routes in place and they already have a "split feeder" issue in place. It is not as drastic for them as it would be for HF.
I would like to see all of the kids that attend LB for Middle School be given automatic Pupil Placement to LB if they want it. Until the OC at SCSS is fixed it should be strongly encouraged.
10:03, My solution is 2B. I think it's the best choice for all 3 schools.
In terms of LB and GT Center, these kids are not mixed with the rest of the school. 7th and 8th grade GT Center classes are actually taught at a higher level than the Honors classes currently offered at the FCPS middle schools. It's not a big deal for them to go back to Robinson, WS, and SC in 9th grade. Many will matriculate to Jefferson.
I think FCPS should set up a middle school GTC at Hayfield for South County and Hayfield students. Lake Braddock says it has room for GT but not base school. Move the Cluster 5 GTC feeders out of Cluster 6 Lake Braddock into Hayfield. Then some developments can be moved permanently into Cluster 6 Lake Braddock from western Silverbrook. Anything west of and including South Oaks Run and Barrington should be examined as far as specific numbers.
Many of these GT kids at LBSS are Lee kids too. LBSS should not be able to hold onto all the "smart" kids, just so their test scores can look better. GT kids should go back to their home school.
Lee HS is near full capacity as well. Having the kids stay at LB helps both schools meet capacity goals.
Of course, if LB is over/full capacity then the GT center should be moved out to a school with room for them.
10:42
That is a good idea, but those GT kids should get to remain at HF if they do not go to TJ.
How many Key/Lee kids are going to LB for GT? They are supposed to go to Twain for GT Center. I do agree that GT kids should go back to their home school.
If I were a SS principal with a GTC I would court the kids and parents. I would encourage them to pupil place for HS, especially if they were also good athletes.
Of course, if they were discipline problems or had PITA parents I would send them away.
Cluster 5 Hayfield, Lee, Edison, South County shows 1 middle school GT center and it is at Twain and only has 98 kids. Lake Braddock has 255 kids in the GT center. The Lorton Station GTC elementary kids therfore some who later go to Hayfield now are bussed to Lake Braddock. How many from each elementary school that goes to Lorton Station?
Building the South County Middle School will impact facilities renovations, additions, and new schools everywhere in this county. Unless it is a corporate or private individual donation many communities will be hurt by this maneuver. All politics are local and this is worse than the Federal House of reprsenatives earmarks.
11:21
Any decision on any facilities affect the others. It is a question of priorities. If the South County Middle School is more important than the others then it should be moved up. The SC families should not have wait any longer than anyone else. Remember they were in trailers at Hayfield for over 15 years - it is hard for them to feel sympathy for the rest of the County.
As for earmarks at the federal level, our local members and Senators will always know the local issues better than the White House (regardless of the party affiliation). They have the obligation to put togther the budget and appropriate $ while the President only puts forth a reccomendation. If the President leaves something out that is important (and all of them always will) then I expect my member to earmark something to fix it.
The proposed SC Middle School is no more important than any other project on the CIP, not when there are more open seats at Hayfield and LB that exceed the overcapacity student number at SC.
Saratoga's GT school is Lake Braddock. They were moved there from Twain as part of the first SCSS boundary study. While most Key students go to Twain for GT, Saratoga goes to Lake Braddock. Lee is right at capacity and losing more students would adversly affect programs, so keeping Lee' GT students at LBSS for high school does not help Lee. GT kids should go back to their home school, and support their own communities. People should move into the LBSS area if they want their kids to go to that school.
from 11:21 AM
to 11:34 AM
No one expects sympathy. The South County Middle School issue goes beyond CIP construction planning and funding schedules. If every school was renovated and we had no trailers for ovrcrowding in this entire county, it still should not be built. Note those 2 conditions apply for this boundary study.
This county spent money on bricks nd mortar capacity that is not in unreasonable locations for homes currently in the South County attendance area. Unfortunately from some people's perspective, since that capacity is also at Lake Braddock and Hayfield it is not adequate. All three options are new or renovated, students will have indoor plumbing, not a single child wil be in a trailer, the core facilities match capacity, etc.
12:32, I agree! Option 2B is the best way to spread out the OC SC students.
from 12:32
When I look at funding projects in various areas, Lorton/Laurel Hill is getting a lot of amemities so I feel no sympathy for not adding a middle school to the Fairfax Station party favors. There are negatives from building this middle school that reflect badly on our county as a whole.
What is going on there with some people who think public acces stuff ike schools and county sports leagues are their private domain? Now a youth sports commisioner from South County Raptors Youth Football is the lead story on Bad Jocks which has national readership and that site links to the articles in the Washington Post about this issue.
http://www.badjocks.com/
If the business/developer/government community is able to contribute to the infrastructure after overbuilding and/or bringing in more jobs and congestion.. we should all stand and applaud. This is how it is supposed to work!
I completely support a new middleschool with the private funding. This could and should work everywhere in our county.
The problem is that SC was supposedly built completely with private dollars and it wasn't. It postponed several major renovations on the CIP list for nearly 1/2 a decade.The overcrowding at SC can be more than eliminated by utilizing the empty seats at Hayfield and Lake Braddock. It is a criminal repudiation of fiscal responsibility not to do so.
1:49
The overcrowding at SC can be reduced, but eliminated with LB and HF. Hayfield was overcrowded for over 15 years and would still be overcrowded if the SC community did not step in and get SCSS built. So what if other projects were "postponed". SCSS should have been ahead of them to begin with as should a Middle School.
Other county projects will be done EARLIER than they should because of the public-private partnerships in South County.
1:33
After a new middle school is built will private funding also support its operation. There is more to cost of a new school then just building it! What is the cost of operation and who do you think will fund that!
Taxpayers will pay for the operation of a new Middle School just like all other schools in the county. South County people pay taxes and not receiving their fair share of the benefit.
"Fair" would be if the School board built the school with taxpayer funds. But, SC will have to figure out a way for them -- again.
The 2:23 post is a concise summary of the South County "Core Community" position. This is why the rest of us must remain diligent.
The FCPS budget is not a private piggy bank for Silverbrook/SCSS parents. There are many other pressing needs in Fairfax County beyond the whims of Crosspointe and Barrington.
The School board did build schools for the kids of South County, and seats are waiting for them at Hayfield and Lake Braddock. If you did not want your kids to travel the long distance to public schools why did you buy a home so far from a public school? There are plenty of homes for sale closer to Hayfield and Lake Braddock.
I find it amusing that what is considered a "core community" in "South County" does not include the Mason Neck community or the Lorton Station community which are further South then the so-called "Core communities"
The South County name is temporary. Once Mason Neck and Lorton are out it will be renamed.
The thing is Mason Neck can buy and sell Barrington and Crosspointe 10x over.
But can they buy a SB member?
I think Crosspointe has.^^^
Not all of Mason Neck is million dollar homes.
With a grammatical error like the one above, it just emphasized the point the the 2 sides of I-95 to be separated into different schools. LS kids can't keep up at SCSS.
But "the the" makes sense? Get a life.
Where do the kids and parents from Lorton Station want to go to Middle School and High School?
Schools are operated out of the Operational Budget. This is completely different from the Capital Improvement Project budget and is also not related to any bond measures.
Mr.Tisdat at fcps will gladly report on spending of bond money and CIP issues for the asking. it is public information.
Let those developers and government that insist on over building then leaving-BUILD THAT MIDDLESCHOOL before they go!
Maybe they can build the elementary too?
I agree. Making developers responsible for helping the community is a must. If we dont insist on them helping, guess who foots the tab? These guys get over $700,00.00 for each home!!
If they build the middleschool for the county, that saves every taxpayer! It is a win-win.
What you are suggesting is a culture change for the County. For years the County has been in a "pro-growth" mode. To stimulate business and the economy businesses were given tax incentives or not burdened with things like you are suggesting.
I agree that we should include things such as schools and parks when building developments. These things should be built as partnerships with the community not solely the responsibility of one or the other.
In the case of SC the board had been resisting the support of private funding.
Until recently the F&P did not want a MS in SC even if it was FREE. With alleged "excess capacity" nearby they did not want the operational costs associated with another school. They are starting to see the light.
There is no need for a SC middle school at the current time. There are more than enough seats between Hayfield and Lake Braddock to accomodate the South County darlings.
Hayfield can take in SOME kids. Lake Braddock MAY be able to take some kids when renovations are complete, but the SC area continues to grow, is expected to continue to grow, and traffic is expected to increase.
The time is NOW for a Middle School. The longer we wait the bigger the problem becomes. It is the only option that can work.
If we start now to build the Middle School it will still take at least 5 years before the doors open. By that time SCSS could be at 150% capacity!
I encourage anyone that disagrees to go visit LB, SC, and HF and see it for yourself.
9:35 - Your post was very funny, I had a good laugh this morning. 8:35 should be really embarrassed.
Then we should implement option 1 until an SC middle school can be built.
We should implement 2A or 2B. 2B is better than 2A.
The EDA, Economic Developement Authority, issued the bonds for South County Secondary School. The EDA is part of Fairfax County and there is debt service on those bonds. The CIP distribution was reduced. This school is not about Silverbrook. It is about providng an asset and a quick revitalization or rejuvenation of SE Fairfax.
Between these 3 schools there will be over 600 open seats next year. Public land not private land was used for this swap.
We needed SCSS long before it was built. We stil need a Middle School and should not wait like we did for SCSS. We should muster all resouces; public, private, or whatever to make that happen.
Of all of the bad options presented so far, 2B is the best. Unfortunately, it is pretty much off the table.
Talk about selfish! The growth in Fairfax County is not just occurring in the southern part. It's exploding at the seams along the western edge as well as the less-populated area along the Potomac.
I vote for 2B.
12:47
Nothing is off the table. Gary said it himself, the SB can take F@P recommendation or not, do nothing, or come up with its own plan or adopt previous options.
Last year, during the WSHS/LHS/LB boundary study, LBSS was reported to have ESOL numbers of HS - 3.3% and MS 8.7%. In this study, just one year later, the ESOL for LB is around 27% (combined HS & MS). Does anyone know the reason for such a big change?
That sounds like a misplaced decimal for one of the years especially considering that LB hasn't had a boundary change in 20+ years.
I have the handouts from all the meetings. From the first SCSS boundary study, the WSHS/Lee/LB study and now. The numbers are correct. That is why I cannot understand such a big change.
Why should Silverbrook be sent to Lake Braddock to "fix" their ESOL percentages? Everybody is pulling their kids out of that school and sending them to private or Catholic schools.
Who said Lake Braddock had an ESOL problem to fix? Whats wrong 5:08 do ESOL kids scare you? If you want a private school then send your kid to a private school I'm sure you could find some backward intolerant community to join, but I bet if you give your kid a try, they would do just fine with kids that are not exactly like them.
Hayfield will take anyone until we hit 93%.
How can you say we're intolerant? Silverbrook is much more diverse than many of the other Fairfax Station communities.
The comment of sending Silverbrook kids to LB somehow will fix a ESOL "problem" leads me to believe that you feel a school with a higher percentage of ESOL is intolerable.
It's not intolerable, simply unnecessary. Sending kids from Lorton Station to Hayfield vs. sending kids from Silverbrook to Lake Bradock will achieve the same goal of lowering the ESOL/FR Lunch demographics for South County.
I am so glad to see that option 3 leaves the southern portion of the Lorton Station school district (around Hagel Circle) at SCSS. SCSS needs this diversity.
10:07,
Who said it is one or the other. The goal is also to reduce overcrowding as South County. Sending kids to both Hayfield and Lake Braddock is the only way to achieve that. Option 2B works.
I just looked at the handout from the last town hall meeting. The room at LBSS is available now and by all projections will be growing. From 2000 to 2006 the Lake Braddock feeder elementary schools for fed 460 less students to Lake Braddock.
10:07 Sending Lorton Station kids out of SC lowers the ESOL and F/R Lunch rate for SC. Sending Silverbrook kids out of SC RAISES the ESOL and F/R Lunch rate for SC. Silverbrook is the backbone of the South County Secondary School. Redistrict Silverbrook and SC will just become another nothing school with gangs and horrendous test scores.
The percentage of ESOL and FRL need to be raised at SCSS to balance with the rest of the area schools. That said, I think a nearby community school is more important than demographics. Bussing in the 60s failed because we tried sending kids to other communites to "balance" the racial make up of the school. The process made all school worse than they were before because parents and kids were less invested in the school. The schools became more equal -- just equally bad.
For those that have not looked at the talking points put out by the Lake Braddock PTSA, I added a link below. Note that every point raised on this white paper is also a concern for us in the Hayfield pyramid. However, a glaring omission of fact by this paper and by the Lake Braddock community as a whole is the fact that in the out years they are losing students at Lake Braddock while Hayfield and South County are increasing students in the feeder schools. They can argue that LBSS will get close to capacity next year if option 1 or 2 is done, but they cannot argue that by every projection the school will continue to become less crowded for the next 5 years even after option 1 or 2 is in place. The same cannot be said of Hayfield.
http://www.lbssptsa.org/Discussion_Points.pdf
6:52
This is all about South County and Silverbrook right?
The LB PTSA paper has the middle school at almost capacity for the middle school. The CA plan noted in this blog would put only 154 middle school students at LB. That is a good compromise!
Couple of rebuttals in regard to the LBSS talking points.
#7 The boundaries of Lake Braddock go all the way to the Occoquan River (further south than Barrington/Crosspointe et. al.) There are already LB kids driving a further distance than the commute that would be Silverbrook to LB.
#3 While it is true that the Lorton Station GT Center did feed into Twain and now has added students into LB, the schools that send kids to the Sangster GT Center have aways fed into the LB GT Center. Perhaps if the Lorton Station GT Center fed into Twain once again, there wouldn't be an issue. There would be more space at LB.
Does Twain have room?
Twain had 2 trailers and Key had 3 for overcrowding on the CIP last year. Hayfield of course has zero. Why would FCPS use additonal resources (busses and more importantly scarce drivers)for sending GTC Hayfield base school students to Twain or Lake Braddock?
Cluster 6 has 4 middle/high/secondary combinations. Some other clusters have 2 or 3. This creates geographic parity and operational efficiency. FCPS is setting up a new GTC at Jackson. Any costs for that are insignificant compared to not properly using LB and Hayfield.
Key is under capacity. Perhaps the trailers are there due to the renovation. I agree that a GT could be set up at Hayfield or Key. Then, Lorton Station, Saratoga and South County students (all cluster 5) could go there and cluster 6 GT students could stay at LB GT. There are also students pupil-placing into LB (high school) after they leave the GT program who should be going to Lee. Perhaps Lake Braddock should stop accepting these pupil-placements if they are so worried about numbers. Sending Saratoga GT kids to Hayfield or Key GT would help to stop this and put students back in their community school.
Those trailers came of the CIP cluster analysis page for the operating budget. They are not the trailers for the renovation. There are many schools not under renovation that showed trailers but listed open capacity. Saratoga had 4 trailers with 33 open capacity.
Go to the CIP which is in adobe and hit the last page and go back for the overcrowing trailer info:
http://www.fcps.edu/fts/cipbook2007-2011.pdf
You are probably right. Anyway, Key is under capacity, but since it is under renovation, Hayfield is the best choice to be a GT school now. That would free-up more space at LB for SCSS students as their home school.
We're losing focus on fixing the problem of SCSS AND not wasting taxpayers' dollars. Option 2B is the best solution.
the gtc posts are relative to the middle school capacity at Lake Braddock which is an argument presentd by that school's pta:
http://www.lbssptsa.org/Discussion_Points.pdf
"3. Lake Braddock Secondary School has the GT Center for our Cluster and we do not want to
lose it. The GT Center is increasing due to the creation of the Sangster Center and the
inclusion of the Lorton Station Center."
IMHO facilities needs to do another plan getting all three of these schools below capacity. 2B still leaves too many students at South County. This is poor planning and the whole process should be based on potential sending areas for the new elementary school not the current bandaids.
Building that middle school could result in many people being voted out of office from other magisterial districts including but not limited to school board members at large and persons on the board of supervisors.
Since Lake Braddock is a cluster VI school, it should be for cluster VI students. If Hayfield had GT for cluster V students, that would reduce numbers at Lake Braddock, and relieve SCSS by sending more students to LB. I don't know Twain's numbers, but it is too far for LS, Silverbrook and Saratoga students. Hayfield is a good option.
Any kid that goes to a GTC at a Secondary School should be encouraged/allowed or perhaps required to stay all six years.
But then you have artificially inflated scores at the GT schools and brain drain at the schools that send kids to the split feeder.
So what. It is better for the kids if they stay all six years.
Can you believe this blog has over 500 posts?
They should only be allowed to stay for GT and then go back to their community school.
If people want a certain high school for GT continuation, MOVE INTO THE BOUNDARIES.
You mean the boundaries that keep changing?
LB is only under consideration to increase (potentially) the population area, not decrease.
5:37
Huh, explain please.
You don't have to worry about buying in the LB district because they are not in consideration to move anyone out of the current boundaries. There are homes in many different budgets that feed into Lake Braddock, from the townhouses off of Shiplett to the 5-acre properties off of Ox and Hampton Rds.
Ok lets get back on track. The South County boundary, as is,will continue to bring more kids if nothing is done. Which part of the current South County boundary did you think will add more people and therefore more students?
Also,
- Lake Braddock will continue to lose kids
- Hayfield will hold steady or increase slightly
Ok,
Again which part of the current South County Boundry will add more kids in the School's projection and in the Mckibben projection? Can anyone answer me that?
I think the area that is closest to SCSS will continue to be developed. That is why the SC boundaries need to be reduced from the west AND east. LB and Hayfield need to both be utilized in solving this overcapacity issue.
HF will welcome Lorton Station or Gunston kids back home to the Hawk nest. Just don't send too many too fast.
SCSS is overcrowded and will remain OC when these studies are complete (all of the options except the stupid #1 option leave them OC). Let's not have TWO overcrowded schools when this is over. Option 3 makes HF too full.
Thanks 8:09
How bout the areas further away from SCSS, North, South? which area will add more population?
Where is the empty, developable land?
South County has to be filled from the bottom up because those people border other jurisdictions with no FX school. I'd send parts of Newington Forest and parts of the right silverbrook barbell to Hayfield along with some more of Lorton Station. Parts of Siverbrook and parts of Halley to Lake Braddock. Mason Neck to South County. Keep shaving developments until each school is under capcty allowing for new developments in Lorton proper. Ignore current elementary school boundaries since they are bogus and will be moot when that new school is built. Move Cluster 5 GTC to Hayfield.
Why do you all want GTC at Hayfield when you are so opposed to Option 1? Both add middle schoolers who would only be there for 2 years.
Hayfield does not want GTC for just the reason you suggest. GTC at HF (or any SS) would only be a good idea if the students stayed all six years and that is unlikely to happen.
This is a reaction to hyprocacy of LB and SB communities using the "overcrowded" and "ping pong students" mantra, but willng to keep the GTC at LB. All of the arguments against Option #1 also apply to having a GTC at a Secondary School.
If LB is really overcrowded, then they have no business with a GTC.
Has the full impact of the prior boundary changes been realize at Hayfield?
Are all Rose Hill students integrated?
Will there continue to be less and less people opting for Private School?
Which School has the most room now and into the future with the current boundries?
Who pays for the operation of a new middle school if it comes about, is that also privately funded?
The school with the most room now and into the future is Mount Vernon, but it is not in the study.
No single school has sufficient room to take enough SC students to get them under capacity. It is questionable if combined that LB and HF have enough space and still be under capacity themselves.
All public school are funded with taxpayer funds (as they should be). The parents in SC pay taxes like everyone else and deserve good quality community schools like everyone else.
The numbers aren't questionable at all. If you actually read the handout, you would see a surplus number of seats if kids are redistricted out of SC into both H/LB. Option 1 is the best and fastest road to a new middle school.
The numbers in the handouts have been questioned extensively. The LB and SB communites have questioned these numbers in great detail and the issue has been brought up over and over again at the community meetings. As a result, F&P stopped staffing Options 2A and 2B and created a phase II to Option 3.
Also, all of the options fail to meet the board's guidance of 93% capacity = full capacity to allow for flexibility and growth.
Option #1 undoubtedly and without question will overcrowd the Middle Schools at HF and LB. It will force adminstrators into using the High Schools to educate students, created a two-class/two-color system. Option #1 has been rejected by the communities, the School Board, principals, educators ... and oh by the way creates a HUGE transportation expense.
The transportation expense of any of the options is miniscule compared to the cost of building a middle school.
4:11 - This boundary study is to relieve overcrowding at SCSS, not to find the best and fastest road to a new middle school. 2A and 2B relieve overcrowding, but are not popular with SCSS parents, because a middle school may not be necessary if either of these options are used. Option 3 is popular because it keeps SCSS overcrowded and helps justify a middle school. Option 1 is popular because once it is in place, SCSS parents will claim a middle school is needed to bring the 7th & 8th grade students back to their community. Don’t forget that the taxpayers are watching.
So 4:53, what is YOUR favorite option?
Option #1 is NOT POPULAR with anyone accept Gary. The SCSS community does not like it one bit, the Hayfield Community hates it, the Lake Braddock community hates it, the principals hate it, the School board hates it ... It would be dead if Gary didn't like it. Let focus on real options that improve education, not hurt it.
4:43 Prove it.
The real option that best solves the SC crisis is option 2A. Removing NF instead of splitting Silverbrook gets more kids out of SC.
Wow, all I hear is don’t put Hayfield at 95%. But they have no problem putting Lake Braddock at 97%. If you send students from South County in options 2a or 2b, you will put Lake Braddock at 97%. Go back and look at the projections for 2007/2008. It’s funny how the planning will not show how long that school will be at the 97%. But I guess that’s o.k. for Hayfield, because they want that school to be under capacity! We at Lake Braddock do not want our school to be at capacity!!
Two years ago, at the first boundary study, Lake Braddock was under capacity and still is. So far, the numbers have been right for that school. BRAC will have a much bigger impace on Hayfield than Lake Braddock. Option 2A or 2B keeps both LB and H at reasonable numbers.
BRAC will an impact on all schools, not just Hayfield! What will happen when you put Lake Braddock at 120% move the kids back to South County and kick the other kids out! Let's wait and see what the numbers are at Lake Braddock!
90% = Full Capacity. If we want to wait a couple of years before we move kids from SB/NF to LB, fine. We can see the impact of the renovations and see how far off Gary's numbers are and see if a MS is feasible. SCSS can just use trailers another couple of years.
HF can take @500 High School and Middle Schoolers and relieve the pressure. That bring HF to full capacity.
Let's just not make HF crowded in the meantime and then make a false promise to "move them back in two years". Bring HF to FULL CAPACITY (= 90%), just don't send them over.
607
If LB is at 97% that is over capacity and busting at the seams. That means teachers have to leave their room and make it available for other teachers. It means teachers move from room to room and don't have their own room Is this the case? If so, you should not be taking in any more kids and should be trying to shed some before you explode like SCSS.
What things could be done to fix the problem at LB? Is LB supporting the building of a MS is SC? Could FCPS move the GTC out to relieve some of the pressure?
There is no problem at LB.
Silverbrook is just stirring up trouble because they feel they have earned the privilege of attending Fairfax Station Secondary, I mean South County SS.
Why does capacity mean 90% for Lake Braddock and Hayfield? WSHS and Lee are currently both over capacity. The school board thought it was ok to add SHV students to WSHS when it was already at 100% capacity. Lake Braddock should stop accepting pupil-placements if they are so overcrowded.
If we move the LB GTC to Hayfield, there will be more than enough room for the entire Silverbrook area, not just the North-of-Silverbrook, West-of-Hooes section. All of Silverbrook to LB and then LB GTC, the LSES and Gunston ES to Hayfield. I think that would crunch the numbers very well.
If the SB moved students to WSHS when it was already at 100% it was wrong and violated its own policy. That was a mistake. Let's not make the same mistakes with LB and HF.
Bottom line is Option 2 brings HF to full operational capacity. Option 3 sends too many. Option 1 sends too many Middle School kids to HF and fails to give them the HS kids it needs.
LB and SB have made a case for delaying the move for a year or two, but the SB needs to do something to relieve the pressure from SCSS and HF needs and wants more High School students. Lets move 500 HS and MS kids to HF and relook the SB move to LBSS in a couple of years.
A GTC at HF or any Secondary School has all the problems that Option #1 creates.
LB is nowhere close to 100% capacity. Neither Newingotn Forest nor Silverbrook has not made a valid case for delaying Option 2A or 2B.
If the School Board delays voting for and implementing the western part of the 2A or 2B option, the rest of the county will vote them out in 2007. It is fiscally corrupt to spend money on trailers at SC when there are empty seats at Lake Braddock as well as Hayfield.
8:57
You may not think the case was valid, but F&P thought it was. They stopped staffing those two options and pushed more on to Hayfield with Option #3!
If the rest of the county understood the issues and contacted their SB member(s) then option 2A or 2B would happen. However, the voices being heard coming from SCSS (Silverbrook) are more numerous than the rest of the county.
Ya know, Gary will not be pushing option #3 to the SB in December. It will be the politically charged schoolboard that accepts it in February after the public hearings.
Its a done deal. Hyland, Albo, McConnell and even Davis. give it up kids.
Tell me again why we have an elected schoolboard? Was it supposed to be free from political influence??
You are right. I quit. Good night.
Don't quit. Hyland, Albo, McConnell, Davis need to know that option 3 is not really popular with most of the Fairfax County voters. The Silverbrookers would love us all to quit. Option 2B and 2A work well and we should not give up. LB needs more kids to fill the excess renovated space, so does Hayfield. SCSS needs relief. This would all be so simple if it we not so political.
Fairfax County voters would vote for looking at Mount Vernon/SCSS/Hayfield if it wasn't so political. Its that simple.
We hire politicians to practice politics so we should not be surprised when they do. To succeed at politics you have to play in the game. To play you have to have a team.
I would like those that bring up Mount Vernon to tell me who would you send to Mount Vernon. Would that be Mason neck? All 80 or so kids going to Middle School. And what Middle School would you send them that has room? I assume our friends up North are in favor of dumping the Mason Neck area over to Mount Vernon sending them on a longer trip up Rt. one in rush hour traffic. Lets stick to the topic.
Albo, Hyland, and Davis don't have votes on SB decisions. Davis and Albo are Republicans and were trying to curry favor with the fatcats of Crosspointe and Barrington.
As Republicans they are supposed to be concerned with fiscal waste. It is a waste of money to build an unnecessary middle school.
Has anyone seen the amount of new housing going at Fort Belvoir. Kids in base housing attend Mt Vernon High School.
Mount Vernon should have been in the study along with a few other areas. If it didn't make sense to send kids there, then we don't do it. But it should have at least been considered. By including more areas it allows the planners exponentially more options.
For example, room in a MV Middle school could have been made by sending another Elem School (or two) to HF that is currently in the MV pyramid ... or even the West Potomac pyramid.
Too late for this study, but if this one is delayed maybe more can be included for phase II.
Moving another ES into HF will create even more open seats at MV and its MS. How does that help SC?
Moving another ES from MV to HF would make room in a MV Middle school for Gunston or LS to go to. There are many more options when you include more areas. You can move things around to make them fit more effectively.
Any changes for the AY 07-08 need to be minor. SC needs help and needs help soon, but adminstrators need time to react to changes, hire staff, develop programs, and communicate with incoming students and parents. We put them in a real bind by forcing major changes too quickly.
9:28
You have an interesting point. If the SB is elected it should make those decisions without undue influence.
To have politicians like Albo, Davis, Hyland and McConnell pledging to make it happen at a neighborhood meeting rips the doors of the hinges and exposes the real mcoy- political influence and pressure.
Olesezk said it this summer when consituents questioned their own Springfield representation. "this is a partisan attempt".
Now we can see very clearly no matter what glasses we wear. The SB has been deflowered.
Political pressure and influence is good. If the SB won't do the right thing (as I define it) then why not use my other representatives to help. It goes both ways.
Hyland, Albo, & McConnell are trying to support their constituents and do what they believe is right. That is whay they are expected to do.
I will use every tool I have as a citizen and try to ralley my fellow citizens to do what we believe is right and best for my community.
The Silverbrook community is really good at this, but they also have much to gain/lose.
What is right is to use the excess capacity both Lake Braddock and Hayfield when reducing the numbers at South County.
I have told all my elected officials from federal to local as well as the FCPS employees that I would like to see Option 2a implemented.
Ok
Change of direction in this discussion.
If funding is found and a new middle school gets moved up and built, will this effect other capital expenditions for schools county wide?
Yes. So what? If it gets moved up then something else gets moved back. It will only get moved up if the SB determines it is a higher priority. If it is a higher priority the MS should be moved up. You can argue that is should or should not be a priority, sure, but the SCSS community is arguing that it is.
Is it the South county argument that a new middle school is needed because of the number of students? or is it a matter of convenience to avoid the distance and time to bus students HSS or LBSS?
Has anyone seen the latest Silverbrook manifesto, I mean list of talking points?
I just looked at the numbers from McKibben. If you look at the capacities for all three schools the break out by middle school and high school then look at the total for all three school's projection for middle school and high school there is not one year that the combined numbers go over capacity or even get to capacity for either the middle school or high school. I wonder if a middle school would ever be necessary in South county base purely on numbers.
2A and 2B would work, and a middle school would never be needed. Why do you think the Silverbrookers got rid of those options?
The MS would be a convenience. There is plenty of unused capacity in the area.
Alls the SB has to do is move it up in the queue. In one more year, there will be another bond issue (every 2 years). They will place advocates on the bond committee, and put the most needed CIP items that were bumped- on the Bond.
FFXCO never turns down education bonds. Never.
OR, the developers/govbernment can give money to be strictly used for CIP items. It is tagged and followed through the system to make sure it is spent as indicated.
This would be the cheaper route to moving up in the queue. Get donations for those in front of you... did you hear me Silverbrook?
Silverbrook should be fighting for 2A. To me 2a and 2b make sense and it is just a matter of who goes. But then again, since when are we going to do anything that makes sense.
Silverbrook is not included in the solution. Trust me.
Hayfielders should get on the bandwagon for the new middleschool in order to save Hayfield from overcrowding.
Brad Center is no match for the Silverbrook crowd. They know he wants to run for Supervisor, and they hold the cards on him...
If Brad thinks he can unseat Dana then he better think again.
If Hayfield ends up over crowded after all is said and done, I am going to move to Lake Braddock, they will have plenty of room in a few years.
Just send HF 500 kids for MS and HS and they will be full. The option 2 boundaries, move Newington Forest, or some other portion of SC. Then they can build a MS or send some to LB, or both.
BTW if WSHS is so full why didn't more of that area go to LB?
According to FCPS,WS and Lee aren't over, they are right AT capacity. Silverbrook is doing everything in its power to talk about supposed overcapacity issues at all the schools that share boarders with LB in order to present a more "urgent" solution to Annandale, Lee, Woodson, Robinson, West Springfield. The South County overcapacity is much worse than any of these schools of which 1 is UC, 2 are at cap, and 2 are over but have solutions in play.
An interesting letter to the connection editor from last spring.
Fixing School Overcrowding
Letter to the Editor
April 6, 2006
To the Editor:
As a resident of the Springfield District in the subdivision of Barrington, it is with great concern that I write about the overcrowding at Silverbrook Elementary School, which my two children (ages 8 and 5) attend. As everyone from this area is well aware, our area of Fairfax County is one of the fastest growing regions in Northern Virginia. While this impacts our daily lives in many ways, none is of more concern than how it affects our children. Simply put, two out of the three schools in our neighborhood are severely overcrowded, while the third sits with eight empty classrooms.
The situation at Silverbrook grows more concerning by the day. According to the Fairfax County Office of Facilities Planning, Silverbrook has a capacity of 1,025 students, with a projected membership of 1,214 in 2006. A couple of things should be pointed out with respect to these numbers, however. First, although Silverbrook is touted as having a capacity of 1,025 — a figure that has long been exceeded by Silverbrook's current population of 1,168 students — this capacity figure is, at best, deceiving. According to the 2004 CIP and more recent Facilities documents, the capacity for Silverbrook's core facility is 856 students. While the modular unit located behind the core facility theoretically increased Silverbrook's capacity to 1,025, it should not be overlooked that, even at that population, the cafeteria, gym and library are servicing 169 more children than they were designed to handle. Adding modular units and "quad pods" does nothing to increase the size of the cafeteria, gym, music rooms and playgrounds that must somehow be stretched to serve a bloated student population. The reality is that, given its present population of 1,168, every day Silverbrook is servicing 312 more students than it was built to accommodate. This fact would be unacceptable on its own, but when taken in conjunction with the reality that Halley is 200 students and eight classrooms undercapacity, it becomes inexcusable.
The problems presented by this overcrowding are not limited to the strains put on the administrators at Silverbrook who have admirably juggled access to these facilities — whose precious energy and creativity could otherwise be devoted to more worthwhile endeavors — and the kids who are shuffled in and out of them. For two years in a row now, Silverbrook has had to add new classes to address grade levels with overcrowded classes. Many of our kids have gone months with 28 to 29 children in their classrooms until, mid-year, a change was made. Needless to say, these mid-year changes are stressful to all involved. Moreover, in addition to restructuring two grade levels (first and third) this February, Silverbrook had to add a quad unit and conduct a major shifting of classrooms. Several third grade classes were moved out to the quad and second grade classes were moved to the third grade pod. Fortunately, we have thus far been spared a mid-year class change in kindergarten due to Silverbrook administrators successfully securing approval for the addition of another kindergarten class just as school was set to begin in September. This did not come without a price either, as approximately 150 kindergartners who eagerly went to Open House fully expecting to meet their teachers and see their classroom — a classic rite of passage for any kindergartener, designed to ease the transition to life in elementary school — were disappointed.
This severe overcrowding also affects the kinds of activities we are able to offer our kids as part of their school community. For the PTA, holding a school carnival (as we did the past two years) was out of the question this year. There was simply no way we could fit the student population and its families in the school for such an event. At the bingo nights we held instead, which were broken into two groups, families had to be turned away because we had no room for them. At Thanksgiving, Silverbrook's usual policy of opening the doors so that parents can join their kids for a special Thanksgiving lunch had to be suspended due to the understandable need to make "feed[ing] over 1,000 students and staff" its first priority.
What makes Silverbrook's overcrowding intolerable, however, is that an answer lies within two miles of our doors. This answer doesn't require that any schools be built immediately or trailers added. It requires only that Halley Elementary's presently empty classrooms be utilized to distribute the student population more evenly. As for the proposals that are currently on the table, proper usage of Halley's capacity requires much more than Facilities' administrative boundary proposal alone can deliver. To use an analogy, this proposal to simply send future students to Halley may stop the "bleeding," but it does nothing to treat the very serious "injury" that exists. In the best case scenario, it proposes to spare Silverbrook an estimated 40 new students through the end of next school year. Moreover, I would urge the School Board members to resist pressure they have received to engage in a quick fix by moving the GT center from Lorton Station to Halley. As Gary Chevalier confirmed at the Community Meeting, movement of the GT center to Halley would foreclose any meaningful overcrowding relief for Silverbrook — leaving Silverbrook stuck with 300 extra students until the new Laurel Hill School is built, which could be anywhere from three to five years from now.
Christine Bachman
Fairfax Station
^^^^And yet the parents in the Silverbrook cachement area whose kids are past elementary school age want to axe the badly needed Laurel Hill ES building project and trade off the land to developers to fund a middle school.
and they resist efforts to move some of them into the UC and nearby Sangster ES.
Wow, someone should replace Silverbrook with SCSS and replace Halley with HF, LB and MV and resubmit the letter.
I heard that Silverbrook wants no part of Sangster because it's a slippery slope to Lake Braddock. They're pushing for Halley/SCSS if only they can get those Hagel Circle types out.
That may be done with this boundary move or the LH boundary move.
Of course they still want to keep the extra $ and the all day kindergarten.
It seems odd that 2 schools were built in the Crosspointe subdivision. It sounds as if it's made the Crosspointe community quite divided.
I think we should support 2A Silverbrook stays in SC and Hayfield doesn't get overcrowded. Win-Win!
I still like the CA Plan.
FCPS needs to adjust all the feeder school and the secondary school in that area. Piece mealing it together is just irresponsible.
That letter said it all. That author,BTW, is now on the side of keeping Silverbrook all together. She knows there is a new Laurel Hill coming and possibly a new middleschool.The risk is leaving SC and never returning. A few more years at oc Silverbrook is now OK.
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/library/internet/politics.htm#campaign%20contributions
There is a lot of talk and emails flying around about the apparent nlack of need of Laurel Hill ES and redistributing all the earmarked funding for a new middle school. Somehow that doesn't seem quite right.
if they say they don't need the elementary school then don't build anything for them ! Have Chevalier do a massive spreadsheet with over 20 elemntary shools , use the GIS , and redistribute all of them. If they keep this up I predict other areas of this county and their elected officials beyond the school board will all be involved. SCSS cut into all sorts of items on the county side ranging from affordable housing to sidewalks/AKA trails. The money came from somewhere - and there are some big fat multi million dollar cash disbursement items on the CIP.
Lorton Station is way over capacity as is Silverbrook. NF and Gunston are full as well. Sangster as well as Halley could take a few kids, but not enough to fix the overall problem.
The solution is an Elementary School and a Middle School. Take enough kids from Lorton (those west of I-95) to reduce the overcrowding and send them to Laurel Hills and the new Middle School. Those on the other side go to Lorton Station and Hayfield. Get rid of the attendence circles that go to Halley, and rearrange the SB, Halley, NF, and the New Laurel Hills into a nice package.
Laurel Hills is necessary. There aren't enough empty seats in surrounding elementary schools to handle the OC issues of Silverbrook and Lorton Station.
This is not the case with 7th-12th graders. There are more extra seats in Lake Braddock and Hayfield than there are kids causing the overcapacity issues at South County.
LHES is needed, a middle school is not.
When Laurel Hills open they could take some of Silverbrook south of Hooes Rd. The Lorton Valley neighborhood and the area east and west of I-95 south of Lorton Rd. now going to Lorton Station could be redistricted to Halley. That would eliminated the Hagel Cir. island, relieve Lorton Station ES overcrowding, use capacity at Halley and should leave enough room at the new Laurel Hill ES to take some of Newington Forest relieving that crowded school. If Lorton Station has room after the above is done, the area North of Lorton Station could possibly be redistricted to Lorton Station ES relieving Gunston ES. Then you would have a nice neat Lorton Station feeder to Hayfield, Gunston, Halley, Laurel Hill, and either Silverbrook or Newington station feeding SCSS. Throw in the Middle school and both Silverbrook and Newington forest could stay in the SCSS boundary.
OK, but doesn't most of Gunston go to HF now? If all of Gunston goes to SC, then HF will need more kids.
The area North of Lorton Station (closer to Hayfield) is in the boundary of Gunston ES believe it our not. Those kids go to Hayfield and in the scenario outlined would be redistricted to Lorton Station and then Continue to go to Hayfield.
I don't know how many kids that area sends to Gunston, and it may make Gunston ES too small. I suppose the line between the new Halley and Gunston boundaries could be moved to give and take for those two schools.
Looking at the map I would further redistrict to Sangster those kids West of Rt. 123 now going to Halley if need be to balance the numbers there as well.
Bottom line is I think they should redo the boundaries for all the Elementary schools now to including the new Laurel Hill school in order to be more efficient in the busing and utilization of the space then be done with it now, instead of doing this again in 2008
Keep Fairfax Station kids in the Fairfax Station area elementary schools of Halley and Silverbrook!Why is it NOT okay for the 7-12 Crosspointe et. al. kids to travel on Lee Chapel but it is okay for the K-6? This is not a good way to get support from the families who will have kids in the school system the longest. I am very upset that my neighbors with older kids aren't looking out for all Barrington and Crosspointe families.
Doesn't alot of Fairfax Station go to Sangster and Lake Braddock?
Looking at an FCPS map, Fairfax Station goes to SC, LB, and Robinson.
Silverbrook has 8 classrooms each for gr 5 and 6. It also has 7 each for 1-4. There are 6 half day kindergarten classes. It is totally irresponsible for the oliticians to be interferring with facilities. Meanwhile, Halley has full day kindergarten for a population which wouldn't have received it if they didn't have Hagel Circle when Lorton Station opened. Lots of Fairfax Station goes to Sangster and Lake Braddock. They're reasonable people. Silverbrook has a lot of large HOA's and more dense neighborhoods than much of Fairfax Station. They want a school situation resembling the City of Falls Church , an island surrounded by Fairfax County.
Then let them incorporate as the town of Crosspointe-Barrington, pay taxes to that town and build their own schools. IE not siphon off the FFXCO dollars. The city of Falls Church pays taxes to that city, not to Fairfax County AND they have their own school system.
Fairfax Station residents also go to Woodson. Remember the Woodson island in the middle of the Robinson school district?
Why is Robinson not good enough for THAT crowd?
Maybe that crowd isn't good enough for Robinson ...
The point is, Fairfax Station is spread over 4 high/secondary schools and is not limited to SCSS. Options 2B and 2A, in that order, are the only options that make sense.
Would the Newington Forest parents prefer their kids go to Hayfield or Lake Braddock if SCSS was not available?
I like 2B, but I think they should delay the Silverbrook move for a year or two. Let the move to Hayfield take place first. It would be less stress on the system.
That Woodson Island is really weird and I heard it was the result of political maneuvering involving Belter. Hopefully strategic governance will take care of all the junk and the vast majority of people in the county will be happier and we all might pay less property taxes.
Post a Comment