Why is the Foxhall Community Citizens Association scared of public school children?

[Anonymous]

And yes, it's the same Angus Worthing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um...isn't this moot at this point the lab got the lease so the whole old Hardy ship has sailed. The only thing worth discussing at this point is whether 5% of the park (which by the way they spent a bunch improving) could be SHARED with an elementary school which would likely maintain the park and folks could use the grounds of the elementary school so like nothing lost unless you are against public school kids and the real motives are classics, racism and entitlement by a selfish closed in close minded group of neighbors.

"classics, racism, and entitlement....."

whoooa--who is this person who feels "entitled" to make these judgements of some "group of neighbors" who in all likelihood he has not even intereacted with

The old Hardy school property is 1.1 acres. Supposedly the lease with Lab school allows the city to use 20% of the DCPS land (.22 acres). And yet the city is telling people that an 80,000 sq foot school building (not including sidewalks etc.) will "take" only 5% of the park (which I think is around 5 acress, hence 1 acre). Meanwhile the 430 student Key elementary campus (3.2 acre ) is claimed to be not large enough. The Stoddert campus is larger.... Why doesn't the city produce actual architectuaral drawing of what the campus l would like? a reasonable request

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um...isn't this moot at this point the lab got the lease so the whole old Hardy ship has sailed. The only thing worth discussing at this point is whether 5% of the park (which by the way they spent a bunch improving) could be SHARED with an elementary school which would likely maintain the park and folks could use the grounds of the elementary school so like nothing lost unless you are against public school kids and the real motives are classics, racism and entitlement by a selfish closed in close minded group of neighbors.

"classics, racism, and entitlement....."

whoooa--who is this person who feels "entitled" to make these judgements of some "group of neighbors" who in all likelihood he has not even intereacted with

The old Hardy school property is 1.1 acres. Supposedly the lease with Lab school allows the city to use 20% of the DCPS land (.22 acres). And yet the city is telling people that an 80,000 sq foot school building (not including sidewalks etc.) will "take" only 5% of the park (which I think is around 5 acress, hence 1 acre). Meanwhile the 430 student Key elementary campus (3.2 acre ) is claimed to be not large enough. The Stoddert campus is larger.... Why doesn't the city produce actual architectuaral drawing of what the campus l would like? a reasonable request

Everyone, including ANC3D, has asked for those drawings. The failure of DCPS to produce them facilitates FCCA scaremongering.

[Anonymous]

OK, there's some semantics here and I think people have been talking past each other. I'll start off by saying that I'm pro-school so you know where I'm coming from.

DCPS has been talking about a tall, narrow building. I'm expecting a three story building with a footprint in the 25,000-30,000 square foot range. They can use 20% of the Old Hardy/Lab lot, which according to the DC Atlas is 49,877 square feet, so that's 10,000 SF. The rec center lot is 204,910 square feet and they've said they're going to use 5% of that, which is another 10,000 SF. So either they need to go to four stories or the footprint is going to be a little bigger than they've let on.

Now, schools use more land than just the footprint of the school building. I expect the school will want to use the playing field and the playground for recess and PE. And if other DCPS schools are any guide, those areas will be closed to the public when school is in session, and open when the school is closed.

So the use of those areas will change. Will you still be able to let your dog off leash on the playing field at noon on a weekday? Probably not. But will the park be "razed," "bulldozed," or "destroyed" as some opponents of the school would have you believe? No, it will still be there, there will just be different people using it, some of the time.

It's very normal in DC for DCPS and DPR facilities to be co-located. Since most DPR facilities are lightly used during school hours it's a way of getting more use out of expensive facilities. People who live near these schools don't consider them burdens, they consider them amenities.

In fact, that's how Hardy operated for over 60 years.

[Anonymous]

I hear they are going to re-zone stoddert and ship a lot of students who live in Glover Park to the new school. The traffic from Glover Park will be horrendous. It is already bad in front on Georgetown.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Some Palisades people have been pushing to get that old hardy school for a long time.

Some history:

The Rose Hardy School served its neighborhood as a public school for over 60 years, first as an elementary and later as a middle school. In 1996 it closed. When it closed the city proposed selling the land and building. The neighbors objected, hoping that the building could be returned to use as a public school. So instead of selling the building the city leased it, for a ten year initial term with three five year extensions. The first lease was in 1998 to the Rock Creek International School. They went bankrupt and Lab purchased the lease from the bankruptcy court. In 2008 the first five year extension was granted.

In 2013, when it was time for the second five year extension, Lab proposed a 50-year extension instead. That idea was shelved after significant community opposition but another five year extension was granted. Lab kept pushing the idea of a 50-year lease, and it kept being opposed by community members. Had nothing happened the building would have reverted to city control in 2023. However, last December, on Christmas Eve and without any community input the city signed a 15-year extension.

So you have your facts backwards.

The irony is that in 1996 it was Foxhall vs. Palisades over whose school would get closed. And Foxhall lost, their school got closed and they had to schlepp up to Key. But they managed to pressure the city into keeping the building so that if some day -- some day -- the kids returned they could have a neighborhood school again. And though in 1996 nobody believed it would ever happen, here we are in 2021 and the kids are back. And it turns out the city didn't really keep the building. And now some neighbors are against a new school.

Those parents in 1996 do not have school age kids anymore. The real problem is there are not enough kids in the area for a new school. So if you build a new school many of the kids will come from outside the area(4/5). Why not build a new school where the demand is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: The real problem is there are not enough kids in the area for a new school. So if you build a new school many of the kids will come from outside the area(4/5).

And the source for that statistic is?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A fascinating list of... mostly nobodies.

By all means feel free to state your identity and list your personal accomplishments.

What are the relevant accomplishments of "Angus Worthing" or "Brett Young"? Their names are listed here as though someone should care.

https://arapc.com/our-providers/angus-b-worthing-md-facr/

Dr. Worthing is a graduate of Princeton University and the University of Minnesota Medical School, where he was elected to the Alpha Omega Alpha national medical honor society and received the Medical Student Achievement Award. He completed internship and residency in Internal Medicine in 2006 and rheumatology fellowship in 2008 at Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC. He also received multiple honors including the Medical Humanities Award and nominations for the String of Pearls Award, given by Georgetown university medical students for excellence in teaching. He is a Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine at Georgetown University Medical Center.

Dr. Worthing has an interest in public policy. He served as chairman of the American College of Rheumatology’s Government Affairs Committee, helping to lead the advocacy agenda for rheumatology on Capitol Hill and at federal agencies like Medicare and the FDA. He also chairs the Public Policy Education Committee of the Rheumatism Society of the District of Columbia, for which he served as president in 2010. He serves on the Board of Directors of the American College of Rheumatology. He is a member of the American Medical Association and the American College of Physicians.

none of this is relevant to education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A fascinating list of... mostly nobodies.

By all means feel free to state your identity and list your personal accomplishments.

What are the relevant accomplishments of "Angus Worthing" or "Brett Young"? Their names are listed here as though someone should care.

https://arapc.com/our-providers/angus-b-worthing-md-facr/

Dr. Worthing is a graduate of Princeton University and the University of Minnesota Medical School, where he was elected to the Alpha Omega Alpha national medical honor society and received the Medical Student Achievement Award. He completed internship and residency in Internal Medicine in 2006 and rheumatology fellowship in 2008 at Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC. He also received multiple honors including the Medical Humanities Award and nominations for the String of Pearls Award, given by Georgetown university medical students for excellence in teaching. He is a Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine at Georgetown University Medical Center.

Dr. Worthing has an interest in public policy. He served as chairman of the American College of Rheumatology’s Government Affairs Committee, helping to lead the advocacy agenda for rheumatology on Capitol Hill and at federal agencies like Medicare and the FDA. He also chairs the Public Policy Education Committee of the Rheumatism Society of the District of Columbia, for which he served as president in 2010. He serves on the Board of Directors of the American College of Rheumatology. He is a member of the American Medical Association and the American College of Physicians.

none of this is relevant to education

Uh, you didn’t read it, did you? Try again, focusing particularly on this sentence, “He also received multiple honors including the Medical Humanities Award and nominations for the String of Pearls Award, given by Georgetown university medical students for excellence in teaching.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A fascinating list of... mostly nobodies.

By all means feel free to state your identity and list your personal accomplishments.

What are the relevant accomplishments of "Angus Worthing" or "Brett Young"? Their names are listed here as though someone should care.

https://arapc.com/our-providers/angus-b-worthing-md-facr/

Dr. Worthing is a graduate of Princeton University and the University of Minnesota Medical School, where he was elected to the Alpha Omega Alpha national medical honor society and received the Medical Student Achievement Award. He completed internship and residency in Internal Medicine in 2006 and rheumatology fellowship in 2008 at Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC. He also received multiple honors including the Medical Humanities Award and nominations for the String of Pearls Award, given by Georgetown university medical students for excellence in teaching. He is a Clinical Assistant Professor of Medicine at Georgetown University Medical Center.

Dr. Worthing has an interest in public policy. He served as chairman of the American College of Rheumatology’s Government Affairs Committee, helping to lead the advocacy agenda for rheumatology on Capitol Hill and at federal agencies like Medicare and the FDA. He also chairs the Public Policy Education Committee of the Rheumatism Society of the District of Columbia, for which he served as president in 2010. He serves on the Board of Directors of the American College of Rheumatology. He is a member of the American Medical Association and the American College of Physicians.

none of this is relevant to education

When you're in a hole, stop digging.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: The real problem is there are not enough kids in the area for a new school. So if you build a new school many of the kids will come from outside the area(4/5).

And the source for that statistic is?

Pulled out of thin air.

DCPS has said that the new elementary school will be filled with students who live within 1.1 miles. If the GDS site is a high school it will be fed by Hardy, while the site has limitations it's the best option within the Hardy boundaries. These facts have been repeated over and over again but the anti-school forces just refuse to acknowledge them.

At one of the community input sessions a Foxhall resident said, "I don't know anyone who sends their kids to public school." That's probably true. But it says more about the speaker and who he knows than about the demographics of the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um...isn't this moot at this point the lab got the lease so the whole old Hardy ship has sailed. The only thing worth discussing at this point is whether 5% of the park (which by the way they spent a bunch improving) could be SHARED with an elementary school which would likely maintain the park and folks could use the grounds of the elementary school so like nothing lost unless you are against public school kids and the real motives are classics, racism and entitlement by a selfish closed in close minded group of neighbors.

"classics, racism, and entitlement....."

whoooa--who is this person who feels "entitled" to make these judgements of some "group of neighbors" who in all likelihood he has not even intereacted with

The old Hardy school property is 1.1 acres. Supposedly the lease with Lab school allows the city to use 20% of the DCPS land (.22 acres). And yet the city is telling people that an 80,000 sq foot school building (not including sidewalks etc.) will "take" only 5% of the park (which I think is around 5 acress, hence 1 acre). Meanwhile the 430 student Key elementary campus (3.2 acre ) is claimed to be not large enough. The Stoddert campus is larger.... Why doesn't the city produce actual architectuaral drawing of what the campus l would like? a reasonable request


The previous poster made a math error. .2*1.1 + .05*5 = .22 + .25. < .5 acres. The city isclaiming it will build a 550 studnet campus (class rooms, gym, cafeteria, library, other common rooms etc...) , common outdoor gathering area (pavement or blacktop--the kids won't be gathering on the grass) sidewalks, a driveway, areas for dumpsters, utility units (AC units etc) parking on less than a half of an acre of land. Anyone with a brain can see the Mayor's/DCPS's/Cheh 's "claims" about how the field other greenspace wont be touched are rediculous. . But people pushing the consturction of the school on hardy park have their own adgenda. thats fine--but cut with the lies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Um...isn't this moot at this point the lab got the lease so the whole old Hardy ship has sailed. The only thing worth discussing at this point is whether 5% of the park (which by the way they spent a bunch improving) could be SHARED with an elementary school which would likely maintain the park and folks could use the grounds of the elementary school so like nothing lost unless you are against public school kids and the real motives are classics, racism and entitlement by a selfish closed in close minded group of neighbors.

"classics, racism, and entitlement....."

whoooa--who is this person who feels "entitled" to make these judgements of some "group of neighbors" who in all likelihood he has not even intereacted with

The old Hardy school property is 1.1 acres. Supposedly the lease with Lab school allows the city to use 20% of the DCPS land (.22 acres). And yet the city is telling people that an 80,000 sq foot school building (not including sidewalks etc.) will "take" only 5% of the park (which I think is around 5 acress, hence 1 acre). Meanwhile the 430 student Key elementary campus (3.2 acre ) is claimed to be not large enough. The Stoddert campus is larger.... Why doesn't the city produce actual architectuaral drawing of what the campus l would like? a reasonable request

The previous poster made a math error. .2*1.1 + .05*5 = .22 + .25. < .5 acres. The city isclaiming it will build a 550 studnet campus (class rooms, gym, cafeteria, library, other common rooms etc...) , common outdoor gathering area (pavement or blacktop--the kids won't be gathering on the grass) sidewalks, a driveway, areas for dumpsters, utility units (AC units etc) parking on less than a half of an acre of land. Anyone with a brain can see the Mayor's/DCPS's/Cheh 's "claims" about how the field other greenspace wont be touched are rediculous. . But people pushing the consturction of the school on hardy park have their own adgenda. thats fine--but cut with the lies

Your straw men are as bad as your spelling. No one who supports the school has any need to lie about anything as DCPS' plans have been made clear by the schematics they've distributed. And those schematics - which opponents of a public school in Foxhall either haven't seen or, more likely, find it convenient to ignore - show that the new school will occupy part of the parking area leased by LAB to the southeast of the Old Hardy building, the embankment and sideline area that lies between the existing soccer field and that LAB parking lot, the outdoor basketball court, and possibly also the Rec Center (which would be co-located).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The old Hardy school property is 1.1 acres. Supposedly the lease with Lab school allows the city to use 20% of the DCPS land (.22 acres). And yet the city is telling people that an 80,000 sq foot school building (not including sidewalks etc.) will "take" only 5% of the park (which I think is around 5 acress, hence 1 acre). Meanwhile the 430 student Key elementary campus (3.2 acre ) is claimed to be not large enough. The Stoddert campus is larger.... Why doesn't the city produce actual architectuaral drawing of what the campus l would like? a reasonable request

The previous poster made a math error. .2*1.1 + .05*5 = .22 + .25. < .5 acres. The city isclaiming it will build a 550 studnet campus (class rooms, gym, cafeteria, library, other common rooms etc...) , common outdoor gathering area (pavement or blacktop--the kids won't be gathering on the grass) sidewalks, a driveway, areas for dumpsters, utility units (AC units etc) parking on less than a half of an acre of land. Anyone with a brain can see the Mayor's/DCPS's/Cheh 's "claims" about how the field other greenspace wont be touched are rediculous. . But people pushing the consturction of the school on hardy park have their own adgenda. thats fine--but cut with the lies

Your straw men are as bad as your spelling. No one who supports the school has any need to lie about anything as DCPS' plans have been made clear by the schematics they've distributed. And those schematics - which opponents of a public school in Foxhall either haven't seen or, more likely, find it convenient to ignore - show that the new school will occupy part of the parking area leased by LAB to the southeast of the Old Hardy building, the embankment and sideline area that lies between the existing soccer field and that LAB parking lot, the outdoor basketball court, and possibly also the Rec Center (which would be co-located).

[Anonymous]

Update:

The Potomac Times is reporting that "protest" signs have been cleared from the fence at Hardy:

https://potomactimes.wordpress.com/2021/10/21/protest-signs-cleared-from-hardy-park-fence/

Once again, the Foxhallers demonstrate their obliviousness by complaining that their illegal signs were taken down.