New DCPS school on former Georgetown Day site will be a high school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Frumin has to know that there's no real available land to build more affordable housing that is convenient to MacArthur HS. That's why DCPS bought the site, despite its unfortunate location - beggars can't be choosers.

There's literally no land available for big affordable housing projects or new schools that is convenient to families, particularly low income ones.

There was (Fannie Mae) and will continue to always be land coming down the pike (Friendship Heights). Particularly with the way commercial RE is going….

Any redevelopment in Friendship Heights will have the bare minimum of IZ units, as per usual in DC. And they want to move the WMATA bus depot to the Lord & Taylor site to build more market-rate/luxury housing on it. So don't expect a school nor very much affordable housing whenever FH is redeveloped. It'll look like 14th Street or H Street.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Having read his page and being very familiar with this issue, the alternative options, and the arguments for and against the new schools, his position seems more nuanced than you are giving him credit for. But it is also a classic example of a candidate carefully crafting a position to be all things to all people (with special attention to the vocal NIMBYs in Foxhall) while putting forth ideas that are superficially appealing but completely unrealistic (buying back LAB's lease; asking them to move to the River School campus). It's taken so long to get movement on the school overcrowding problem in Ward 3 and finally we have traction. Any candidate who can say with a straight-face that they support public education and yet want to put a "pause" on that movement should be viewed with some suspicion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Having read his page and being very familiar with this issue, the alternative options, and the arguments for and against the new schools, his position seems more nuanced than you are giving him credit for. But it is also a classic example of a candidate carefully crafting a position to be all things to all people (with special attention to the vocal NIMBYs in Foxhall) while putting forth ideas that are superficially appealing but completely unrealistic (buying back LAB's lease; asking them to move to the River School campus). It's taken so long to get movement on the school overcrowding problem in Ward 3 and finally we have traction. Any candidate who can say with a straight-face that they support public education and yet want to put a "pause" on that movement should be viewed with some suspicion.

On the plus side, he's also talking himself out of the Mary Cheh endorsement that will probably be decisive.

[Anonymous]

I think Frumin is right. Terrible location and even the existing building on the site sucks. DCPS should not have bought the GDS school. All kinds of buildings are now opening up that could become schools. They could have built a school at FH - Lord & Taylor, Mazza Gallery or bus depot. And it could have been built from scratch. It is a good location accessible by metro, bus and car.

[Anonymous]

Or the city could have bought the Washington Episcopal Center for Children in Chevy Chase, DC. That is a great site with big grounds. You could have a school + sports fields all in one place. Or Woodley Park where the massive hotel is being sold off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or the city could have bought the Washington Episcopal Center for Children in Chevy Chase, DC. That is a great site with big grounds. You could have a school + sports fields all in one place. Or Woodley Park where the massive hotel is being sold off.

It wasn't for sale. That's why Maret is leasing it. DCPS didn't want to do a leased facility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Frumin has to know that there's no real available land to build more affordable housing that is convenient to MacArthur HS. That's why DCPS bought the site, despite its unfortunate location - beggars can't be choosers.

There's literally no land available for big affordable housing projects or new schools that is convenient to families, particularly low income ones.

All along MacArthur Blvd. is zoned for mid-rise residential. There could be a lot more housing there if it was all developed. It wouldn't be big projects, instead a lot of medium sized ones.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Frumin has to know that there's no real available land to build more affordable housing that is convenient to MacArthur HS. That's why DCPS bought the site, despite its unfortunate location - beggars can't be choosers.

There's literally no land available for big affordable housing projects or new schools that is convenient to families, particularly low income ones.

All along MacArthur Blvd. is zoned for mid-rise residential. There could be a lot more housing there if it was all developed. It wouldn't be big projects, instead a lot of medium sized ones.

People who think Palisades / Foxhall is all $2m+ palaces clearly haven’t driven along MacArthur Blvd.. There are dozens of under-subscribed condos with quite reasonable rents in the various mid-rise apartment blocks along the street. Many of these are right next to the schools. The area is much more economical diverse than people on here tend to give it credit for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Frumin has to know that there's no real available land to build more affordable housing that is convenient to MacArthur HS. That's why DCPS bought the site, despite its unfortunate location - beggars can't be choosers.

There's literally no land available for big affordable housing projects or new schools that is convenient to families, particularly low income ones.

All along MacArthur Blvd. is zoned for mid-rise residential. There could be a lot more housing there if it was all developed. It wouldn't be big projects, instead a lot of medium sized ones.

People who think Palisades / Foxhall is all $2m+ palaces clearly haven’t driven along MacArthur Blvd.. There are dozens of under-subscribed condos with quite reasonable rents in the various mid-rise apartment blocks along the street. Many of these are right next to the schools. The area is much more economical diverse than people on here tend to give it credit for.

I live in Palisades and agree completely. Many families move into the neighborhood and cram themselves into those apartments so they can attend the public schools. I suspect with the new schools many more will.

What's impossible to predict is how people's behavior will change with the new schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Having read his page and being very familiar with this issue, the alternative options, and the arguments for and against the new schools, his position seems more nuanced than you are giving him credit for. But it is also a classic example of a candidate carefully crafting a position to be all things to all people (with special attention to the vocal NIMBYs in Foxhall) while putting forth ideas that are superficially appealing but completely unrealistic (buying back LAB's lease; asking them to move to the River School campus). It's taken so long to get movement on the school overcrowding problem in Ward 3 and finally we have traction. Any candidate who can say with a straight-face that they support public education and yet want to put a "pause" on that movement should be viewed with some suspicion.

I've known Matt for a long time and I love him to death as a person, but positions like this give me pause in supporting him. At a certain point you can be so nuanced as to be meaningless. Matt always wants to be the conciliator, which is great, but sometimes you need to actually stake out a position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think Frumin is right. Terrible location and even the existing building on the site sucks. DCPS should not have bought the GDS school. All kinds of buildings are now opening up that could become schools. They could have built a school at FH - Lord & Taylor, Mazza Gallery or bus depot. And it could have been built from scratch. It is a good location accessible by metro, bus and car.

The L&T dead horse is well and truly beaten by now. It was not available to DCPS. There were no other viable properties available. To Frumin’s credit, he recognizes that there are good options to improve the accessibility of the MacArthur and Foxhall sites - not just through expanding the bus services but also developing the unused trolley trail that runs right behind the GDS site. But the idea of revisiting the at-risk preference for the HS and hitting a pause on the development of the ES is pure pandering to the FCCA NIMBYs and should be denounced unreservedly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Having read his page and being very familiar with this issue, the alternative options, and the arguments for and against the new schools, his position seems more nuanced than you are giving him credit for. But it is also a classic example of a candidate carefully crafting a position to be all things to all people (with special attention to the vocal NIMBYs in Foxhall) while putting forth ideas that are superficially appealing but completely unrealistic (buying back LAB's lease; asking them to move to the River School campus). It's taken so long to get movement on the school overcrowding problem in Ward 3 and finally we have traction. Any candidate who can say with a straight-face that they support public education and yet want to put a "pause" on that movement should be viewed with some suspicion.

On the plus side, he's also talking himself out of the Mary Cheh endorsement that will probably be decisive.

Mary Cher’s endorsement won’t make a difference. The Washington Post endorsement is the only one that matters.

[Anonymous]

We're an IB Hardy feeder family. We're excited about this, this site is a short 5-10 minute bike ride from our place. I hope they put in new bike lanes/trails though. The roads around there a bit mad-max at rush hour.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ward 3 candidates are starting to come out with positions on this. What are people's takes?

Here's Frumin on Foxhall and MacArthur:

https://fruminforward3.com/food-for-thought-new-schools/

He thinks we should pause planning for the Foxhall ES to see if that money might be better spent elsewhere in Ward 3 DCPS and says the idea of a 50/50 boundary/lottery HS for 1,000 kids on MacArthur is idealistically sound but logistically unsound because a.) the school is not in a central location, making it difficult to reach for many; and b.) building a new half-lottery school in Ward 3 will only draw kids away from already-underutilized high schools elsewhere in the city. He envisions a high school on the MacArthur site for 700, but doesn't say where those 700 should come from (Hardy plus kids moved from Wilson? Redrawn W3 boundaries? Hardy plus fewer lottery seats?)

He also says "the way to increase access to Ward 3 schools is to build more affordable housing in the area, a project to which I am deeply committed."

Well, good luck with that. Ward 3 is definitely getting more housing, but almost none of it will be affordable because developers can't make money off such housing.

Having read his page and being very familiar with this issue, the alternative options, and the arguments for and against the new schools, his position seems more nuanced than you are giving him credit for. But it is also a classic example of a candidate carefully crafting a position to be all things to all people (with special attention to the vocal NIMBYs in Foxhall) while putting forth ideas that are superficially appealing but completely unrealistic (buying back LAB's lease; asking them to move to the River School campus). It's taken so long to get movement on the school overcrowding problem in Ward 3 and finally we have traction. Any candidate who can say with a straight-face that they support public education and yet want to put a "pause" on that movement should be viewed with some suspicion.

On the plus side, he's also talking himself out of the Mary Cheh endorsement that will probably be decisive.

Mary Cher’s endorsement won’t make a difference. The Washington Post endorsement is the only one that matters.

She’s already endorsed another candidate… for what it’s worth … Duncan.

Frumin wasn’t so impressive when he jumped in trying to be a change agent on the last school boundary efforts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or the city could have bought the Washington Episcopal Center for Children in Chevy Chase, DC. That is a great site with big grounds. You could have a school + sports fields all in one place. Or Woodley Park where the massive hotel is being sold off.

Lafayette Karen has entered the chat.

The ECC building was never for sale.