Deal is tremendously overcrowded - something is to give

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One Idea That Never Dies For UMC DCPS

1. Concentrate all UMC (preferably white) students at Deal/Wilson.
2. Lobby against affordable housing on Deal/Wilson cachement.
3. Lobby against OOB students in Deal/Wilson cachement.
4. Lobby against expanded transportation in Deal/Wilson cachement by clutching pearls re: “buses destroying foundations of our homes.”
5. Lobby, salivating, for sueing residency cheaters, preferably brown.
6. Lobby, salivating, for sueing boundry cheaters, preferably brown.
7. Blame parents in EOTP/across the river schools for bad parenting, poverty.
8. Rinse and repeat.

Vs. the one other idea: keep sending as many students as possible to Deal/Wilson in hopes that no politically unpleasant decisions need be made and no one notices the decline in educational quality for every single student regardless if color due to overcrowding.

What is your answer to the question in the title of this thread?

A little known fact is Ward 3 today contains the second highest number of rent controlled apartments among DC’s wards. These tends to be units in older, non-luxury buildings. Yet the “smart growth” lobby, while professing to support affordable housing, is actively pushing for amendments to the DC comprehensive plan which, if enacted, would upzone many of these rent controlled apartment buildings, leading to their demolition and a significant reduction of affordable housing in the Wilson cachement area. Don’t be seduced by the disingenuous spin of big development special interests.

Ward 3 has a lot older residents in those rent controlled apartments, though. Where are the kids in rent control in Ward 3?

The way rent control works is the greatest benefit accrues to people who have been living in the same place the longest. When an apartment becomes vacant the rent can increase up to 30%. I doubt a lot of young families benefit from rent control.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One Idea That Never Dies For UMC DCPS

1. Concentrate all UMC (preferably white) students at Deal/Wilson.
2. Lobby against affordable housing on Deal/Wilson cachement.
3. Lobby against OOB students in Deal/Wilson cachement.
4. Lobby against expanded transportation in Deal/Wilson cachement by clutching pearls re: “buses destroying foundations of our homes.”
5. Lobby, salivating, for sueing residency cheaters, preferably brown.
6. Lobby, salivating, for sueing boundry cheaters, preferably brown.
7. Blame parents in EOTP/across the river schools for bad parenting, poverty.
8. Rinse and repeat.

This is pretty funny

[Anonymous]

I teach at Deal.

The school isn’t overcrowded. The building is unsafe due to the mapping and layout of the school. Too many classrooms are too far from one another. Too many students of different grades and too many varieties of of classrooms are too far for each student to travel to. Consequently, kids are prone to socialize more, arrive late to class, and that leads to unsafe conditions. Whoever was involved in this planning should field these questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach at Deal.

The school isn’t overcrowded. The building is unsafe due to the mapping and layout of the school. Too many classrooms are too far from one another. Too many students of different grades and too many varieties of of classrooms are too far for each student to travel to. Consequently, kids are prone to socialize more, arrive late to class, and that leads to unsafe conditions. Whoever was involved in this planning should field these questions.

thank u for speaking up

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I teach at Deal.

The school isn’t overcrowded. The building is unsafe due to the mapping and layout of the school. Too many classrooms are too far from one another. Too many students of different grades and too many varieties of of classrooms are too far for each student to travel to. Consequently, kids are prone to socialize more, arrive late to class, and that leads to unsafe conditions. Whoever was involved in this planning should field these questions.

My kid is at Deal and has long complained about the distances and the scramble to get to class on time.

But I'm scratching my head about how that leads to unsafe conditions or what is wrong with kids socializing?

FWIW I distinctly remember having to scramble in both MS and HS to get between classes on time and 30 years later am hard pressed to think of what was unsafe about that?

[Anonymous]

I also work at Deal and would argue that the gym and cafeteria are horribly overcrowded and unsafe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also work at Deal and would argue that the gym and cafeteria are horribly overcrowded and unsafe.

But what is that, compared with our Mayor's platitudinous promise of "Alice Deal for All"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One Idea That Never Dies For UMC DCPS

1. Concentrate all UMC (preferably white) students at Deal/Wilson.
2. Lobby against affordable housing on Deal/Wilson cachement.
3. Lobby against OOB students in Deal/Wilson cachement.
4. Lobby against expanded transportation in Deal/Wilson cachement by clutching pearls re: “buses destroying foundations of our homes.”
5. Lobby, salivating, for sueing residency cheaters, preferably brown.
6. Lobby, salivating, for sueing boundry cheaters, preferably brown.
7. Blame parents in EOTP/across the river schools for bad parenting, poverty.
8. Rinse and repeat.

Vs. the one other idea: keep sending as many students as possible to Deal/Wilson in hopes that no politically unpleasant decisions need be made and no one notices the decline in educational quality for every single student regardless if color due to overcrowding.

What is your answer to the question in the title of this thread?

A little known fact is Ward 3 today contains the second highest number of rent controlled apartments among DC’s wards. These tends to be units in older, non-luxury buildings. Yet the “smart growth” lobby, while professing to support affordable housing, is actively pushing for amendments to the DC comprehensive plan which, if enacted, would upzone many of these rent controlled apartment buildings, leading to their demolition and a significant reduction of affordable housing in the Wilson cachement area. Don’t be seduced by the disingenuous spin of big development special interests.

Who is the dim Ward 3 nimby who keeps making this idiotic point at every opportunity?

Can you provide a single example of a building with a lot of rent controlled apartments that someone has proposed for upzoning? As in provide an address of such a building and what has been proposed for the lot.

Rent controlled apartments are a tiny percentage of apartments in both DC and in Ward 3. And those apartments are not apportioned based on income so there is essentially no correlation between those units and assisting low income folks in finding an affordable place to live.

Please drop this stupid argument - I know it seems really clever to you but your argument makes no sense.

Upzoning the major arterials in Ward 3 (Wisconsin, Connecticut, Massachusetts, etc.) to permit the same height and density as downtown is one of the Comp Plan amendments proposed by GreaterGreaterGreed and the big development echo chamber. It would have the impact of eliminating many affordable older units.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In response to the post about a city not housing its working poor/class. This is non-sequitur as DC has fictitious borders more so than most cities. Anywhere else most of close in MD and VA would be part of “the city”. Pushing the working class to PG or Silver Spring counts as living in DC except for the cachet of the DC address. Being poor has consequences and not getting the best accommodations or being able to provide everything you want for your child is part of that.

Man, I hope you get mugged by some of the poor people that you hate so much

You rich WOTP people are disgusting

Do you really mean to say that when DC is one of the few US cities where armed robbery and murder with guns spiked last year? Mayor "Vision Zero" Bowser has much to answer for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One Idea That Never Dies For UMC DCPS

1. Concentrate all UMC (preferably white) students at Deal/Wilson.
2. Lobby against affordable housing on Deal/Wilson cachement.
3. Lobby against OOB students in Deal/Wilson cachement.
4. Lobby against expanded transportation in Deal/Wilson cachement by clutching pearls re: “buses destroying foundations of our homes.”
5. Lobby, salivating, for sueing residency cheaters, preferably brown.
6. Lobby, salivating, for sueing boundry cheaters, preferably brown.
7. Blame parents in EOTP/across the river schools for bad parenting, poverty.
8. Rinse and repeat.

Vs. the one other idea: keep sending as many students as possible to Deal/Wilson in hopes that no politically unpleasant decisions need be made and no one notices the decline in educational quality for every single student regardless if color due to overcrowding.

What is your answer to the question in the title of this thread?

A little known fact is Ward 3 today contains the second highest number of rent controlled apartments among DC’s wards. These tends to be units in older, non-luxury buildings. Yet the “smart growth” lobby, while professing to support affordable housing, is actively pushing for amendments to the DC comprehensive plan which, if enacted, would upzone many of these rent controlled apartment buildings, leading to their demolition and a significant reduction of affordable housing in the Wilson cachement area. Don’t be seduced by the disingenuous spin of big development special interests.

Who is the dim Ward 3 nimby who keeps making this idiotic point at every opportunity?

Can you provide a single example of a building with a lot of rent controlled apartments that someone has proposed for upzoning? As in provide an address of such a building and what has been proposed for the lot.

Rent controlled apartments are a tiny percentage of apartments in both DC and in Ward 3. And those apartments are not apportioned based on income so there is essentially no correlation between those units and assisting low income folks in finding an affordable place to live.

Please drop this stupid argument - I know it seems really clever to you but your argument makes no sense.

Upzoning the major arterials in Ward 3 (Wisconsin, Connecticut, Massachusetts, etc.) to permit the same height and density as downtown is one of the Comp Plan amendments proposed by GreaterGreaterGreed and the big development echo chamber. It would have the impact of eliminating many affordable older units.

No it would not - please provide a specific example.

And you allegation is provably untrue - no such proposals as you allege have been made.

And in fact the opposite is more likely to happen - not building adequate housing to meet demand is likely to cause owners of older buildings to realize they aren't maxing the yield from these buildings and start to renovate them and raise the rents. In fact this exact thing just happened at the southeast corner of Tilden and Connecticut where a previously musty old building was recently gutted and units are now renting for $2500 and up.

[Anonymous]

I'm all for upzoning NW. We can start with David Alpert's house. After all, GGW constantly inveighs against any and all SFHs so close to the Metro, and that's exactly the situation with his SFH, which is like 2 blocks away from Dupont. He can practice what he preaches.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I also work at Deal and would argue that the gym and cafeteria are horribly overcrowded and unsafe.

This. Has the fire inspector ever witnessed lunch at Deal? Cramming over 500 students into the cafeteria cannot be safe. There are 3 doors. It's a tragic accident waiting to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for upzoning NW. We can start with David Alpert's house. After all, GGW constantly inveighs against any and all SFHs so close to the Metro, and that's exactly the situation with his SFH, which is like 2 blocks away from Dupont. He can practice what he preaches.

You NIMBY's are insufferable.

And ignorant. Or willfully misleading because you know your followers are too ignorant and scared to do any basic research.

David was a vocal proponent for an upzoning a block from his home. He even wrote a blog post about it.

I presume you won't be responding to my request for examples of buildings that will be torn down and rent controlled units lost because of your alleged upzoning?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm all for upzoning NW. We can start with David Alpert's house. After all, GGW constantly inveighs against any and all SFHs so close to the Metro, and that's exactly the situation with his SFH, which is like 2 blocks away from Dupont. He can practice what he preaches.

You NIMBY's are insufferable.

And ignorant. Or willfully misleading because you know your followers are too ignorant and scared to do any basic research.

David was a vocal proponent for an upzoning a block from his home. He even wrote a blog post about it.

I presume you won't be responding to my request for examples of buildings that will be torn down and rent controlled units lost because of your alleged upzoning?

Of course, the GreaterGreaterGreed flack ignores the elephant in the room. If you massively densify AU Park and Chevy Chase DC and other Ward 3 neighborhoods with lots more multi-family housing, whether hi-end or “affordable,” just where will all those new students go to school? Janney, Deal, Wilson? They have lots of capacity.

PS. There are over 1500 new mutlfamily homes under construction right now in just two blocks (3400/4000) of Wisconsin alone. Almost 1000 other units, many of which are matter of right, are slated within the Janney district, north of Albemarle St along Wisconsin and at the fomer Superfresh site in AU Park.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I teach at Deal.

The school isn’t overcrowded. The building is unsafe due to the mapping and layout of the school. Too many classrooms are too far from one another. Too many students of different grades and too many varieties of of classrooms are too far for each student to travel to. Consequently, kids are prone to socialize more, arrive late to class, and that leads to unsafe conditions. Whoever was involved in this planning should field these questions.

My kid is at Deal and has long complained about the distances and the scramble to get to class on time.

But I'm scratching my head about how that leads to unsafe conditions or what is wrong with kids socializing?

FWIW I distinctly remember having to scramble in both MS and HS to get between classes on time and 30 years later am hard pressed to think of what was unsafe about that?

Uniformly what I have heard from kids new to Deal is how stressful it is trying to get to and from class on time without getting in trouble for running. I went to a high school that had a ridiculously poor, impractical layout designed in the 60's. My school addressed the problem by adjusting the schedule. There were still people monitoring the Halls and the outside cooridors between the various buildings (yes, we had maultiple buildings we had to travel between in an area with long winters, lots of snow, and cold temps). We didn't have a problem with fighting, kids made it to class, and even had a moment to have a nice exchange with a friend. Deal should look at its schedule to address this issue. The kids don't need the stress and from what the kids report, the school is focusing on crowd control versus the stress on the kids.