Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1000 4th St., SW - Sq. 542, Lot 822 - is DC owned and north of DCRA and not the tax office. It's right across from the hole for the new yuppy building.

Both lots are owned by the District. But the lot you're talking about is discussed as the NE parcel here: http://www.swtlqtc.com/2015/01/excavation-to-begin-this-week-at-1001.html

It will be a 400,000 sf building with 20% of the space for affordable units--at 80% AMI, which is almost $86,000 a year. Rents for a 2br will be over $2100 a month. This is not public housing. Again, not that neighborhoods or schools shouldn't include public housing. Jefferson is getting some pretty good test scores--about the same as Stuart-Hobson--from their low-income students.

PP, you're incorrect. The yuppy/dink hole in the ground known as 1001 4th St., SW is privately owned. The land across the street is DC-owned. Your link doesn't talk about what will become of the DC land. I assume you live in SW and want to promote Jefferson for the sake of your neighborhood. But Brent is on Capitol Hill and its kids need to stay there. My recollection is that all of SW continues to feed to Wilson. Wilson isn't exactly a prize, given the reports of illegal activity coming on this blog.

https://www.taxpayerservicecenter.com/RP_Detail.jsp?ssl=0542%20%20%20%200828

Seems like your expertise is in real estate/development matters, not DC Public Schools. Unless Bowser takes action, this is the last year that residents of SW and the Capitol Riverfront will have in-bound preference for Wilson. And, like it or not, Wilson is the best DCPS has to offer and is good enough to retain UMC families WOTP who have other options.

Did you read the link? The west lot was dc owned and sold to the devloper of skyhouse. The east plot is dc owned, which is why DMPED is the one asking for the pud extension. They will put out an rfp for the 400k sf building w/ 80percent market units.

Anyway, this is quite the tangent. Jefferson has scores on par with s-h now. A renovation, hundreds more apartments, and the good principal, plus ib will make it better. No one has to choose it but it isn't a bad choice.

Your recollection is wrong. And where will your kids attend high school that you are so uppity yourself?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1000 4th St., SW - Sq. 542, Lot 822 - is DC owned and north of DCRA and not the tax office. It's right across from the hole for the new yuppy building.

Both lots are owned by the District. But the lot you're talking about is discussed as the NE parcel here: http://www.swtlqtc.com/2015/01/excavation-to-begin-this-week-at-1001.html

It will be a 400,000 sf building with 20% of the space for affordable units--at 80% AMI, which is almost $86,000 a year. Rents for a 2br will be over $2100 a month. This is not public housing. Again, not that neighborhoods or schools shouldn't include public housing. Jefferson is getting some pretty good test scores--about the same as Stuart-Hobson--from their low-income students.

PP, you're incorrect. The yuppy/dink hole in the ground known as 1001 4th St., SW is privately owned. The land across the street is DC-owned. Your link doesn't talk about what will become of the DC land. I assume you live in SW and want to promote Jefferson for the sake of your neighborhood. But Brent is on Capitol Hill and its kids need to stay there. My recollection is that all of SW continues to feed to Wilson. Wilson isn't exactly a prize, given the reports of illegal activity coming on this blog.

https://www.taxpayerservicecenter.com/RP_Detail.jsp?ssl=0542%20%20%20%200828

Anonymous wrote:1000 4th St., SW - Sq. 542, Lot 822 - is DC owned and north of DCRA and not the tax office. It's right across from the hole for the new yuppy building.

Both lots are owned by the District. But the lot you're talking about is discussed as the NE parcel here: http://www.swtlqtc.com/2015/01/excavation-to-begin-this-week-at-1001.html

It will be a 400,000 sf building with 20% of the space for affordable units--at 80% AMI, which is almost $86,000 a year. Rents for a 2br will be over $2100 a month. This is not public housing. Again, not that neighborhoods or schools shouldn't include public housing. Jefferson is getting some pretty good test scores--about the same as Stuart-Hobson--from their low-income students.

What is Clemens selling in the Cluster? Is she promoting her teachers (high turn over rate at WES and SH)? Is she selling Stuart Hobson as a dynamic place with more stability (some of her superstars are planning to bail at the end of the year)? Is she singing the praises of her administration team (she and other administrators are still under investigation from last year's uproar)? Maybe she is trying to sell herself as a permanent fixture with wonderful ideas and programming (the Cluster may be broken into smaller parts next year - one principal per campus)? She is also selling a bridge in Brooklyn, any takers?

Unfortunately, as you look around the city that are not many viable options. If you must choose SH, make the decision because it is closer to home and you are willing to go the long haul. The Cluster has MANY kinks that need to be worked out and will be exposed at the end of this year. The PTA needs to get a firm handle on matters if the big shake up happens. If you get in, make yourself heard on what it is that you were seeking via this recruitment process.

With the new boundaries, no SE or SW schools are zoned for Wilson.

Is that true for the new boundaries?

Right now about a quarter of the Brent attendance zone is actually in-bound for Wilson.

1000 4th St., SW - Sq. 542, Lot 822 - is DC owned and north of DCRA and not the tax office. It's right across from the hole for the new yuppy building.

Last I checked Brent is located on Capitol Hill and not in SW. Does Brent then get to go to Wilson if it's really SW?

Anonymous wrote:Quibble Dribble. Those projects aren't going away anytime soon and there are lots. My understanding is DC wantsto build a low-income apt buipding on 4th Street just north of the DCRA building.

That is 100% untrue. The building under construction north of the office of taxation and revenue will be 100% market rate. Any other building in SW currently in the planning or financing stages has at most about 8% affordable units with "affordable" generally defined as 80% of AMI...or over $80,000 a year in household income.

DCHA is working on a plan for Greenleaf that would include the same number of public housing units but 2-3 times that number of workforce and market-rate units.

Also, I don't know why everyone is freaked out that Jefferson has kids who live in public housing going there. Jefferson students are making more progress than the DC average and most of them are scoring proficient or advanced on the CAS. The test scores do not show that Stuart-Hobson is actually better at teaching kids. It just happens to have about 40 more white kids and a few dozen with incomes that don't qualify them for free lunch.

Anonymous wrote:Quibble Dribble. Those projects aren't going away anytime soon and there are lots. My understanding is DC wantsto build a low-income apt buipding on 4th Street just north of the DCRA building. The Hill would be better off with one MS and that's SH. Right now SH is a shit hole, but it could be an actual neighborhood school if the Hill community fed to it. Hard to create a community here where everyone seems to want to bifurcate things so everyone in his or her right mind says screw it and leaves. Brent feeding to Jefferson is asinine. SH as part of the Cluster is asinine too.

1. As I said, not all the low income housing is in projects. Some is in tax credit buildings - private buildings that have SOME market rate units and some income limited units, and that got tax credits to help finance construction. The income limits are only for a term of years, which is almost over.

2. It is true Greenleaf won't be gone SOON. I did not say soon.

3. Do you have a link for a new low income building?

4. I have no opinion on optimal feeder patterns, just correcting people on RE info.

^^^^ Lady where have you been. There isn't anyone left IB to the Cluster after Peabody. And people seriously start moving come 2nd grade. Take a reality pill.

Anonymous wrote:Quibble Dribble. Those projects aren't going away anytime soon and there are lots. My understanding is DC wantsto build a low-income apt buipding on 4th Street just north of the DCRA building. The Hill would be better off with one MS and that's SH. Right now SH is a shit hole, but it could be an actual neighborhood school if the Hill community fed to it. Hard to create a community here where everyone seems to want to bifurcate things so everyone in his or her right mind says screw it and leaves. Brent feeding to Jefferson is asinine. SH as part of the Cluster is asinine too.

SH wouldn't have enough seats for everyone on the Hill in the first place. What are you talking about?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Brent parent here. I am curiois abot the pitch to attemd SH. Nothing I have learned about the school, including test scores evidencing 40 percent non-proficiency and 6 out of 10 students being FARMs eligible, would entice me to jump through the hoop of sending DC to Watkins for 5th Grade and then onto SH. So long as BASIS and Latin can effectively accommodate the Brent cohort, this play by the Cluster will be DOA.

Sounds like you're a little out of the loop. Not a problem, as I'm sure others will cherish the spot you're not going to take up through that shady scheme. Still, and not to talk you out of it but rather for those who are taking a closer look, Stuart-Hobson has a number of things going for it that neither Basis nor Latin can match: location, robust honors program in all cores subjects, individualized schedules with numerous electives that allow for specializations in fine arts, liberal arts, and STEM, free extended school until 4 or 6, versatile sports program, lasting (and newly expanding) museum partnerships, and, last but not least, the highest rate of kids getting into application high schools.

That's always been Clemens selling point but I'd like to see more evidence. It also demonstrates the absurd inequality that a small slice of students can succeed when there is such high tolerance for failure.

Let's also be honest in saying that only a few middle schools in the whole city even have the courses required to prepare students for these application high schools. It's a very small pool.

Gosh, I hadn't realized that all those high-SES kids living IB for the Cluster were headed off to greater success at places like Banneker, CHEC and McKinley.