Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"I wasn't on the CWG but I would presume (or at least like to presume) that the map was never intended to propose intended boundaries but rather to demonstrate a school of that size could be supported by the current demographics (even without an OOB enrolment)."

Bingo. What they were trying to demonstrate was that were enough existing DCPS students within a mile of the school to fill it.

"I imagine that GP families' concerns about the map weren't given due attention because the boundaries on that example weren't ever intended to be taken that seriously." More specifically, the DCPS representatives kept saying, "this isn't the actual map, it's just an example." But the Stoddert reps refused to hear it.

I missed this until now, but Chancellor Ferebee's March letter is explicit that Stoddert's boundaries will be redrawn to supply the Foxhall school: "The new school will be an elementary school serving PK4-5th grade. This will require drawing a new boundary that re-assigns portions of the Key, Mann and Stoddert boundaries..."
https://fruminforward3.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Foxhall_CIP-Letter_March-2022.pdf

To the extent this discussion became about whether the proposed boundaries were 'an example' or not, and the behavior of the CWG, that is now moot. The boundaries are going to split Glover Park (there's really no part of Stoddert that makes sense). I welcome the promised support of the Foxhall and Palisades community members who will argue against this change. I hope the members of the CWG who posted earlier will also make their views publicly known.

You present a false dichotomy. Some of Stoddert should be re-assigned to Mann. Some of Mann to Key and Foxhall. A lot of Key to Foxhall.

This is entirely consistent with Ferebee’s comment.

Annoyingly for me, you're right. Both our interpretations are consistent. Back to the argument, then.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

What kid is going to ride their bike from Ward 7 or 8 with a full backpack and a musical instrument, each way all year?

It’s a domino effect. Shuffle all the kids leftward a bit.

In any event, which neighborhood elementary schools are accessible by people throughout the city? It’s a pretty silly standard.

Three in four kids in DC don't attend their neighborhood public school, and almost all of them attend school to the west of where they live. But they don't go far in general. So there's definitely a domino effect.

That seems very true for public schools but it might not apply to charters. I wonder whether data would confirm my sense that charter students of poorer families travel west and UMC charter students travel east, and they go to charter schools together, for a time.

There are no charter west of Rock Creek Park. So if you live there and want to go to a charter, you have to go east.

Sure, and there are more charters in NE than EOTP NW, so EOTP NW families also generally go east for charters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

What kid is going to ride their bike from Ward 7 or 8 with a full backpack and a musical instrument, each way all year?

It’s a domino effect. Shuffle all the kids leftward a bit.

In any event, which neighborhood elementary schools are accessible by people throughout the city? It’s a pretty silly standard.

How many kids take readily available metro and metrobus to Wilson and Deal every day?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

What kid is going to ride their bike from Ward 7 or 8 with a full backpack and a musical instrument, each way all year?

It’s a domino effect. Shuffle all the kids leftward a bit.

In any event, which neighborhood elementary schools are accessible by people throughout the city? It’s a pretty silly standard.

Three in four kids in DC don't attend their neighborhood public school, and almost all of them attend school to the west of where they live. But they don't go far in general. So there's definitely a domino effect.

That seems very true for public schools but it might not apply to charters. I wonder whether data would confirm my sense that charter students of poorer families travel west and UMC charter students travel east, and they go to charter schools together, for a time.

There are no charter west of Rock Creek Park. So if you live there and want to go to a charter, you have to go east.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"I wasn't on the CWG but I would presume (or at least like to presume) that the map was never intended to propose intended boundaries but rather to demonstrate a school of that size could be supported by the current demographics (even without an OOB enrolment)."

Bingo. What they were trying to demonstrate was that were enough existing DCPS students within a mile of the school to fill it.

"I imagine that GP families' concerns about the map weren't given due attention because the boundaries on that example weren't ever intended to be taken that seriously." More specifically, the DCPS representatives kept saying, "this isn't the actual map, it's just an example." But the Stoddert reps refused to hear it.

I missed this until now, but Chancellor Ferebee's March letter is explicit that Stoddert's boundaries will be redrawn to supply the Foxhall school: "The new school will be an elementary school serving PK4-5th grade. This will require drawing a new boundary that re-assigns portions of the Key, Mann and Stoddert boundaries..."
https://fruminforward3.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Foxhall_CIP-Letter_March-2022.pdf

To the extent this discussion became about whether the proposed boundaries were 'an example' or not, and the behavior of the CWG, that is now moot. The boundaries are going to split Glover Park (there's really no part of Stoddert that makes sense). I welcome the promised support of the Foxhall and Palisades community members who will argue against this change. I hope the members of the CWG who posted earlier will also make their views publicly known.

You present a false dichotomy. Some of Stoddert should be re-assigned to Mann. Some of Mann to Key and Foxhall. A lot of Key to Foxhall.

This is entirely consistent with Ferebee’s comment.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

What kid is going to ride their bike from Ward 7 or 8 with a full backpack and a musical instrument, each way all year?

It’s a domino effect. Shuffle all the kids leftward a bit.

In any event, which neighborhood elementary schools are accessible by people throughout the city? It’s a pretty silly standard.

Three in four kids in DC don't attend their neighborhood public school, and almost all of them attend school to the west of where they live. But they don't go far in general. So there's definitely a domino effect.

That seems very true for public schools but it might not apply to charters. I wonder whether data would confirm my sense that charter students of poorer families travel west and UMC charter students travel east, and they go to charter schools together, for a time.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

"I wasn't on the CWG but I would presume (or at least like to presume) that the map was never intended to propose intended boundaries but rather to demonstrate a school of that size could be supported by the current demographics (even without an OOB enrolment)."

Bingo. What they were trying to demonstrate was that were enough existing DCPS students within a mile of the school to fill it.

"I imagine that GP families' concerns about the map weren't given due attention because the boundaries on that example weren't ever intended to be taken that seriously." More specifically, the DCPS representatives kept saying, "this isn't the actual map, it's just an example." But the Stoddert reps refused to hear it.

I missed this until now, but Chancellor Ferebee's March letter is explicit that Stoddert's boundaries will be redrawn to supply the Foxhall school: "The new school will be an elementary school serving PK4-5th grade. This will require drawing a new boundary that re-assigns portions of the Key, Mann and Stoddert boundaries..."
https://fruminforward3.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/Foxhall_CIP-Letter_March-2022.pdf

To the extent this discussion became about whether the proposed boundaries were 'an example' or not, and the behavior of the CWG, that is now moot. The boundaries are going to split Glover Park (there's really no part of Stoddert that makes sense). I welcome the promised support of the Foxhall and Palisades community members who will argue against this change. I hope the members of the CWG who posted earlier will also make their views publicly known.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

What kid is going to ride their bike from Ward 7 or 8 with a full backpack and a musical instrument, each way all year?

It’s a domino effect. Shuffle all the kids leftward a bit.

In any event, which neighborhood elementary schools are accessible by people throughout the city? It’s a pretty silly standard.

Three in four kids in DC don't attend their neighborhood public school, and almost all of them attend school to the west of where they live. But they don't go far in general. So there's definitely a domino effect.

Anonymous wrote:

"I wasn't on the CWG but I would presume (or at least like to presume) that the map was never intended to propose intended boundaries but rather to demonstrate a school of that size could be supported by the current demographics (even without an OOB enrolment)."

Bingo. What they were trying to demonstrate was that were enough existing DCPS students within a mile of the school to fill it.

"I imagine that GP families' concerns about the map weren't given due attention because the boundaries on that example weren't ever intended to be taken that seriously." More specifically, the DCPS representatives kept saying, "this isn't the actual map, it's just an example." But the Stoddert reps refused to hear it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

What kid is going to ride their bike from Ward 7 or 8 with a full backpack and a musical instrument, each way all year?

It’s a domino effect. Shuffle all the kids leftward a bit.

In any event, which neighborhood elementary schools are accessible by people throughout the city? It’s a pretty silly standard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

What kid is going to ride their bike from Ward 7 or 8 with a full backpack and a musical instrument, each way all year?

It’s a domino effect. Shuffle all the kids leftward a bit.

In any event, which neighborhood elementary schools are accessible by people throughout the city? It’s a pretty silly standard.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

What kid is going to ride their bike from Ward 7 or 8 with a full backpack and a musical instrument, each way all year?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

Better solution....buy Lab out of their lease and set them up somewhere else and expand the Old Hardy school into a new Foxhall ES. It is what should have been done years ago.

This would require an admission by Bowser that her Old Hardy giveaway wasn't on the level (which it certainly wasn't). Never happening.

There are not enough students in this area to justify it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

Better solution....buy Lab out of their lease and set them up somewhere else and expand the Old Hardy school into a new Foxhall ES. It is what should have been done years ago.

This would require an admission by Bowser that her Old Hardy giveaway wasn't on the level (which it certainly wasn't). Never happening.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Look, I think the NIMBYs in foxhall are silly; we do need more schools and the new high school in that location immediately relieves Jackson-Reed by diverting rich families from Jackson-Reed and opening up room there. But Hardy rec is one of the least accessible sites in the city. Why not build another school in Volta Park, Jelleff, Guy Mason, Newark, Forest Hills, or Turtle Park. They Key/Mann axis is the least overcrowded part of Ward 3. A new school at guy mason or jelleff wouldn't annoy the stoddert parents. This site is some suburban no-mans land. There is a reason GDS got rid of their white elephant over there.

All of this. The Foxhall location is just bad bad bad. And no, I am not a Foxhall NIMBY. People simply won't be able to get there reasonable during Rush Hour.

You do realize that the rush hour traffic runs in the opposite direction, right? And there are ample options to improve the accessibility of the area - such as restoring the Palisades Trolley Trail and putting in a bus only lane on Reservoir. The city has four years to sort these out, which is more than enough time.

Foxhall ES is not designed to be a school for the entire city. But it will reduce crowding at other elementary schools that are more accessible and increase options for children across the city to access better schools.

Better solution....buy Lab out of their lease and set them up somewhere else and expand the Old Hardy school into a new Foxhall ES. It is what should have been done years ago.