How has Hardy drawn inbound families?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless by "new" high school they mean "different from Wilson" and try to reroute Hardy to an existing HS like Coolidge. I can see them saying something like that--depends what their definition of "new" is in this case...

Logistics, people. For the love of God, look at a map.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
According to a report of a meeting between Smith and ANC 3C this week (which represents Woodley and Cleveland Park and Cathedral Heights) all Smith would say is that she "could see" Hardy continuing to feed to Wilson if all the puzzle pieces fall into place. Seems like that's a promise (together with your DC tax refund) that you can take to the bank!

I heard a different first-hand different report on that meeting, with Smith saying that she was not in position to confirm it at that moment, but their projections suggested that Hardy will feed into Wilson.

Anyway, whatever she said, I can live with the idea that Hardy will feed into a new HS which will be build nearby. Both my sons (4th and 5th grade) will have gone through Hardy and will be at Wilson at that time...(this won't happen before 6-8 years!).

She sounded very tentative to me and it was one of the times when she seemed to get into vague corporate-speak.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
According to a report of a meeting between Smith and ANC 3C this week (which represents Woodley and Cleveland Park and Cathedral Heights) all Smith would say is that she "could see" Hardy continuing to feed to Wilson if all the puzzle pieces fall into place. Seems like that's a promise (together with your DC tax refund) that you can take to the bank!

I heard a different first-hand different report on that meeting, with Smith saying that she was not in position to confirm it at that moment, but their projections suggested that Hardy will feed into Wilson.

Anyway, whatever she said, I can live with the idea that Hardy will feed into a new HS which will be build nearby. Both my sons (4th and 5th grade) will have gone through Hardy and will be at Wilson at that time...(this won't happen before 6-8 years!).

[b]She sounded very tentative to me and it was one of the times when she seemed to get into vague corporate-speak[b].

IMO believing that a new high school will be built nearby (i.e., west of Rock Creek Park) is very wishful thinking.

(1) There are few suitable sites owned by the DC government. Ellington, the old Western HS site, supposedly is planned for renovation. Although logically a new Ellington should be located more centrally, closer to Metro and ideally adjacent to a major performing arts venue, many at Ellington apparently suspicious of any suggestion that the school no longer be in Georgetown. Another possibility, the old Hardy school site on Resevoir Rd., is mostly controlled by DPR and is probably too small for a high school site.

(2) Politically, building a new high school WOTP will be a challenge. The irony is that some of the same folks demanding access to Wilson from EOTP, even if it means kicking out Hardy, are categorically opposed to any new school construction WOTP.

The bottom line is that if Hardy is moved out of the Wilson feeder plan, it will be to a to-be-determined high school that by definition is "new to Hardy" and likely not nearby. This is why Smith is speaking tentatively and in "vague corporate -speak."

[Anonymous]

What do all you people think of The current Francis Stephens campus being turned into a high school that Hardy Middle School would feed into? This is currently being discussed on another thread.

Sorry that I cannot comment on the state of their soccer field, but I know that they have 2 inside basket ball courts.... and a auditorium.

And to answer the original question, people like myself who are educated and high SES want a cohort of high achieving students with the option to learn a language which is taught 4 or 5 times a week.

[Anonymous]

Another stupid idea.

Recall that there is a crunch at Wilson if and only if the entire SW remains IB, and the areas EOTP remain IB. If Hardy is being removed, it comes after SW and EOTP have already been removed. And by this point, there is no longer such a pressing capacity issue.

If you search through the threads, this pointless idea was proposed by a poster who lamented that good students were currently IB for FS while she was IB with a terrible cohort. She wanted to do something like take the Ross kids and the FS kids and combine them with her IB school. To make it seem more reasonable, she then suggested to use the now vacant FS as a HS for Hardy (and, presumably, Hardly alone). She failed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

(1) There are few suitable sites owned by the DC government. Ellington, the old Western HS site, supposedly is planned for renovation. Although logically a new Ellington should be located more centrally, closer to Metro and ideally adjacent to a major performing arts venue, many at Ellington apparently suspicious of any suggestion that the school no longer be in Georgetown. Another possibility, the old Hardy school site on Resevoir Rd., is mostly controlled by DPR and is probably too small for a high school site.

The old Hardy site is over five acres, more than twice the size of the current Ellington site. The rec center is no longer controlled by DPR, all DPR properties were transferred to DGS in October 2011 -- which shows that transferring property between agencies is no big deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

(1) There are few suitable sites owned by the DC government. Ellington, the old Western HS site, supposedly is planned for renovation. Although logically a new Ellington should be located more centrally, closer to Metro and ideally adjacent to a major performing arts venue, many at Ellington apparently suspicious of any suggestion that the school no longer be in Georgetown. Another possibility, the old Hardy school site on Resevoir Rd., is mostly controlled by DPR and is probably too small for a high school site.

The old Hardy site is over five acres, more than twice the size of the current Ellington site. The rec center is no longer controlled by DPR, all DPR properties were transferred to DGS in October 2011 -- which shows that transferring property between agencies is no big deal.

Provide evidence of the accuracy of these numbers. I've read (somewhere not quite reputable) different numbers showing Ellington slightly larger than Old Hardy (including, I believe, DPR land).

You mention the Rec CENTER. This is distinct from the grounds, no? If so, you are engaging in deliberate obfuscation.

[Anonymous]

SW and EOTP aren't the crunch. There are 1248 kids at Deal and 371 at Hardy. Assuming equal grade sizes, that alone puts 540 potential kids into Wilson next year. Wilson's capacity is only 1431. Their current enrollment is 1696. They can't handle 2160.

Some Hardy and Deal kids will go to private schools, charters, SWW/Banneker/Ellington, or move out of the district. But some kids who could have gone to Hardy or Deal but picked charters will go to Wilson, and some new families with high school-aged kids will move to upper NW. There's not enough capacity at Wilson and taking out SW and Adams doesn't come close to solving it.

If Francis-Stevens became another HS fed by Adams and Hardy with SW having a right to attend, some very cool specialized programs (maybe foreign service, with the state department and the universities so close by, though this may require a change to plans for Roosevelt? Take museum studies out of Ellington and make a museum-focused HS? public health?) I could see it working, and some folks who think Wilson is too big for their kids might actually prefer it. But where would the PK-8 kids go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

(1) There are few suitable sites owned by the DC government. Ellington, the old Western HS site, supposedly is planned for renovation. Although logically a new Ellington should be located more centrally, closer to Metro and ideally adjacent to a major performing arts venue, many at Ellington apparently suspicious of any suggestion that the school no longer be in Georgetown. Another possibility, the old Hardy school site on Resevoir Rd., is mostly controlled by DPR and is probably too small for a high school site.

The old Hardy site is over five acres, more than twice the size of the current Ellington site. The rec center is no longer controlled by DPR, all DPR properties were transferred to DGS in October 2011 -- which shows that transferring property between agencies is no big deal.

Provide evidence of the accuracy of these numbers. I've read (somewhere not quite reputable) different numbers showing Ellington slightly larger than Old Hardy (including, I believe, DPR land).

You mention the Rec CENTER. This is distinct from the grounds, no? If so, you are engaging in deliberate obfuscation.

You can access the DC Atlas here:
http://atlasplus.dcgis.dc.gov/

Set the basemap to "DC Property Basemap" using the drop-down on the right. This will allow you to see all property lines and square/lot numbers.

The street address of the old Hardy School is 1550 Foxhall Road, NW. It is square 1363, lot 0980. The street address of the rec center is 4500 Q Street NW, square 1363, lot 0981.

The street address of Ellington is 3601 Reservoir Road NW. It is square 1293 lot 0803.

The DC real property assessment records are searchable here:
https://www.taxpayerservicecenter.com/RP_Search.jsp?search_type=Assessment

If you search for each square and lot, here's what you get for land area, in square feet, for each lot:

1363 0980 49,853=1.44 acres
1363 0981 204,910=4.70 acres
At Hardy: 6.14 acres

1293 0803 126,701=2.91 acres

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SW and EOTP aren't the crunch. There are 1248 kids at Deal and 371 at Hardy. Assuming equal grade sizes, that alone puts 540 potential kids into Wilson next year. Wilson's capacity is only 1431. Their current enrollment is 1696. They can't handle 2160.

Some Hardy and Deal kids will go to private schools, charters, SWW/Banneker/Ellington, or move out of the district. But some kids who could have gone to Hardy or Deal but picked charters will go to Wilson, and some new families with high school-aged kids will move to upper NW. There's not enough capacity at Wilson and taking out SW and Adams doesn't come close to solving it.

If Francis-Stevens became another HS fed by Adams and Hardy with SW having a right to attend, some very cool specialized programs (maybe foreign service, with the state department and the universities so close by, though this may require a change to plans for Roosevelt? Take museum studies out of Ellington and make a museum-focused HS? public health?) I could see it working, and some folks who think Wilson is too big for their kids might actually prefer it. But where would the PK-8 kids go?

Um, I think you're forgetting that there will be a senior class graduating, so that 1696 number will not include them--there won't be five grade levels there next year!

If you estimate that around 430 kids graduate, that would leave around 1270 in 10th, 11th, and 12th grades. Then add the approx. 540 freshman and you have an approximate enrollment of 1820, or around 120 more than this year.

That's if everyone from Deal and Hardy go to Wilson instead of private or charter, and if everyone at Wilson now stays at Wilson next year, AND if no other kids who don't go to Deal or Hardy but are IB for Wilson decide to go to Wilson (as in, leave their private or charter middle school for free high school).

Number would go up, but likely not as high as 2160.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Um, I think you're forgetting that there will be a senior class graduating, so that 1696 number will not include them--there won't be five grade levels there next year!...

Number would go up, but likely not as high as 2160.

If 540 kids enter next year, and the same enter the next three years, then at some point there will be 2160 kids there. It's 540x4.

That's extreme, to be sure. Some kids at Deal and Hardy won't end up at Wilson. But there are 540 kids a year from those schools who have a right to attend, not counting kids at Adams or who live in areas zoned for Wilson but not for Wilson feeders. It's going to be a problem, and cutting out Mt. Pleasant and SW isn't going to solve it. It seems there's no will to abolish the out of boundary guaranteed feeder rule. Hardy's probably the next most reasonable solution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um, I think you're forgetting that there will be a senior class graduating, so that 1696 number will not include them--there won't be five grade levels there next year!...

Number would go up, but likely not as high as 2160.

If 540 kids enter next year, and the same enter the next three years, then at some point there will be 2160 kids there. It's 540x4.

That's extreme, to be sure. Some kids at Deal and Hardy won't end up at Wilson. But there are 540 kids a year from those schools who have a right to attend, not counting kids at Adams or who live in areas zoned for Wilson but not for Wilson feeders. It's going to be a problem, and cutting out Mt. Pleasant and SW isn't going to solve it. It seems there's no will to abolish the out of boundary guaranteed feeder rule. Hardy's probably the next most reasonable solution.

Explain to me how cutting Hardy makes more sense than cutting EOTP and SW. Seriously. For now we can ignore geography and just talk numbers. I contend that it doesn't make sense to cut Hardy before SW and EOTP from a purely numbers stand-point. When you factor in the logistics and geography, this notion is completely, utterly idiotic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
According to a report of a meeting between Smith and ANC 3C this week (which represents Woodley and Cleveland Park and Cathedral Heights) all Smith would say is that she "could see" Hardy continuing to feed to Wilson if all the puzzle pieces fall into place. Seems like that's a promise (together with your DC tax refund) that you can take to the bank!

I heard a different first-hand different report on that meeting, with Smith saying that she was not in position to confirm it at that moment, but their projections suggested that Hardy will feed into Wilson.

Anyway, whatever she said, I can live with the idea that Hardy will feed into a new HS which will be build nearby. Both my sons (4th and 5th grade) will have gone through Hardy and will be at Wilson at that time...(this won't happen before 6-8 years!).

She sounded very tentative to me and it was one of the times when she seemed to get into vague corporate-speak[b].

IMO believing that a new high school will be built nearby (i.e., west of Rock Creek Park) is very wishful thinking.

(1) There are few suitable sites owned by the DC government. Ellington, the old Western HS site, supposedly is planned for renovation. Although logically a new Ellington should be located more centrally, closer to Metro and ideally adjacent to a major performing arts venue, many at Ellington apparently suspicious of any suggestion that the school no longer be in Georgetown. Another possibility, the old Hardy school site on Resevoir Rd., is mostly controlled by DPR and is probably too small for a high school site.

(2) Politically, building a new high school WOTP will be a challenge. [b]The irony is that some of the same folks demanding access to Wilson from EOTP, even if it means kicking out Hardy, are categorically opposed to any new school construction WOTP.

The bottom line is that if Hardy is moved out of the Wilson feeder plan, it will be to a to-be-determined high school that by definition is "new to Hardy" and likely not nearby. This is why Smith is speaking tentatively and in "vague corporate -speak."



What is the evidence supporting this statement in bold?

I've never heard anyone say this. On the contrary, people EOTP would be happy to see new construction WOTP if it meant continued access for them to Deal and/or Wilson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
According to a report of a meeting between Smith and ANC 3C this week (which represents Woodley and Cleveland Park and Cathedral Heights) all Smith would say is that she "could see" Hardy continuing to feed to Wilson if all the puzzle pieces fall into place. Seems like that's a promise (together with your DC tax refund) that you can take to the bank!

I heard a different first-hand different report on that meeting, with Smith saying that she was not in position to confirm it at that moment, but their projections suggested that Hardy will feed into Wilson.

Anyway, whatever she said, I can live with the idea that Hardy will feed into a new HS which will be build nearby. Both my sons (4th and 5th grade) will have gone through Hardy and will be at Wilson at that time...(this won't happen before 6-8 years!).

She sounded very tentative to me and it was one of the times when she seemed to get into vague corporate-speak[b].

IMO believing that a new high school will be built nearby (i.e., west of Rock Creek Park) is very wishful thinking.

(1) There are few suitable sites owned by the DC government. Ellington, the old Western HS site, supposedly is planned for renovation. Although logically a new Ellington should be located more centrally, closer to Metro and ideally adjacent to a major performing arts venue, many at Ellington apparently suspicious of any suggestion that the school no longer be in Georgetown. Another possibility, the old Hardy school site on Resevoir Rd., is mostly controlled by DPR and is probably too small for a high school site.

(2) Politically, building a new high school WOTP will be a challenge. [b]The irony is that some of the same folks demanding access to Wilson from EOTP, even if it means kicking out Hardy, are categorically opposed to any new school construction WOTP.

The bottom line is that if Hardy is moved out of the Wilson feeder plan, it will be to a to-be-determined high school that by definition is "new to Hardy" and likely not nearby. This is why Smith is speaking tentatively and in "vague corporate -speak."

What is the evidence supporting this statement in bold?

I've never heard anyone say this. On the contrary, people EOTP would be happy to see new construction WOTP if it meant continued access for them to Deal and/or Wilson.




The html is messed up from a previous post. I was asking for evidence that "some of the same folks demanding access to Wilson from EOTP, even if it means kicking out Hardy, are categorically opposed to any new school construction WOTP."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um, I think you're forgetting that there will be a senior class graduating, so that 1696 number will not include them--there won't be five grade levels there next year!...

Number would go up, but likely not as high as 2160.

If 540 kids enter next year, and the same enter the next three years, then at some point there will be 2160 kids there. It's 540x4.

That's extreme, to be sure. Some kids at Deal and Hardy won't end up at Wilson. But there are 540 kids a year from those schools who have a right to attend, not counting kids at Adams or who live in areas zoned for Wilson but not for Wilson feeders. It's going to be a problem, and cutting out Mt. Pleasant and SW isn't going to solve it. It seems there's no will to abolish the out of boundary guaranteed feeder rule. Hardy's probably the next most reasonable solution.

Explain to me how cutting Hardy makes more sense than cutting EOTP and SW. Seriously. For now we can ignore geography and just talk numbers. I contend that it doesn't make sense to cut Hardy before SW and EOTP from a purely numbers stand-point. When you factor in the logistics and geography, this notion is completely, utterly idiotic.

Not PP, but I think they were saying that even after cutting EOTP and SW, you may still need to cut Hardy.