Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

We all now know those number are BS, but the working group took them as gospel. Not sure any of the group's recommendations still hold for the elementary school. The money may be better used building a small school on that site for foxhall folks and diverting even more to dramatically increase stoddert (instead of just replacing the trailers).

The Working Group didn't make any recommendations. I was on the Working Group. There was no voting, or polling, or even really vetting of ideas. There was an exchange of information. Any decisions that were made belong to DCPS, the DME, and the Mayor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

We all now know those number are BS, but the working group took them as gospel. Not sure any of the group's recommendations still hold for the elementary school. The money may be better used building a small school on that site for foxhall folks and diverting even more to dramatically increase stoddert (instead of just replacing the trailers).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

The important thing to remember here is that DCPS dishonestly measured the median (and mean) Stoddert/Glover Park student as only 1.2 miles from the new school. That means that many (less than 50%, say 45%?) of those Stoddert students fall within a (claimed) 1.1 mile radius for Foxhall. You see why DCPS stuck to that measurement! Their mapping software is showing them Glover Park students.

https://ibb.co/Dtjft2Y
from
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17d7ZYwYlkVre4sc4EiH3SWpU-FL5zvj_

Anonymous wrote:I think the FCCA board and president are self appointed. I am a local and have never heard of any election.

Anonymous wrote:A bike lane on Dalecaria would benefit only Maryland cyclists. I have no interest tin paying for them

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But notion that Glover Park is led by progressive YIMBYs is belied by facts. Facts like October 2021 ANC3B 5-0 resolution that strongly opposed a DDOT proposal to install bicycle lanes that would have made it safer for Ward 3 residents to get to school, work, and wherever else (https://anc3b.org/wp-content/uploads/ANC3B-bike-lane-resolution-signed-11-18-21-1.pdf), an argument that they felt the need to bolster by making up things about ANC3D.

Yes, there are NIMBYs in Foxhall and the Palisades. And there are also ample people in those neighborhoods who are sick of their quality of life being adversely affected by half-truths spread by a small number of people who want nothing in their neighborhood to change ever. This thread is good evidence of that. What is your point, exactly?

Not to distract from the rest of the thread, but it's kinda interesting to think who is more 'YIMBY'. Obviously none of Ward 3 is, in an absolute sense. The best I could think of is population growth from 2010 to 2020:
ANC 3B (Glover Park) grew 12.2%
ANC 3D (Foxhall and Palisades) grew 6.9%
from https://planning.dc.gov/anc-smd-redistricting-data-maps

Reiterating this just being for fun, I'd match 3B's 37th Street (which I supported, and lost) with 3D's Dalecarlia Parkway debacle, and ongoing 'no sidewalk on or access to Chain Bridge except for residents'. Plus the obvious trump card, grocery stores added!

Not to really derail the thread, but I'm as avid as bike commuter as they come and I had zero interest in supporting the proposed bike lane on Dalecarlia Pkwy. The topography is horrendous and it would have served few others than MD residents with easy access to the CCT. DDOT went after it because they thought it wouldn't invite much opposition as the road doesn't have any parking, but neglected to consider that it wasn't going to garner many supporters either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But notion that Glover Park is led by progressive YIMBYs is belied by facts. Facts like October 2021 ANC3B 5-0 resolution that strongly opposed a DDOT proposal to install bicycle lanes that would have made it safer for Ward 3 residents to get to school, work, and wherever else (https://anc3b.org/wp-content/uploads/ANC3B-bike-lane-resolution-signed-11-18-21-1.pdf), an argument that they felt the need to bolster by making up things about ANC3D.

Yes, there are NIMBYs in Foxhall and the Palisades. And there are also ample people in those neighborhoods who are sick of their quality of life being adversely affected by half-truths spread by a small number of people who want nothing in their neighborhood to change ever. This thread is good evidence of that. What is your point, exactly?

Not to distract from the rest of the thread, but it's kinda interesting to think who is more 'YIMBY'. Obviously none of Ward 3 is, in an absolute sense. The best I could think of is population growth from 2010 to 2020:
ANC 3B (Glover Park) grew 12.2%
ANC 3D (Foxhall and Palisades) grew 6.9%
from https://planning.dc.gov/anc-smd-redistricting-data-maps

Reiterating this just being for fun, I'd match 3B's 37th Street (which I supported, and lost) with 3D's Dalecarlia Parkway debacle, and ongoing 'no sidewalk on or access to Chain Bridge except for residents'. Plus the obvious trump card, grocery stores added!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

DCPS knows the address of every one of their current students. They have mapping software, they can do things like "give me every student with distance x of this point." When talking about it, they were studious not to say where those students precisely lived. Student privacy restrictions keep them from talking about even things like how many students are on a block.

Anonymous wrote:

But notion that Glover Park is led by progressive YIMBYs is belied by facts. Facts like October 2021 ANC3B 5-0 resolution that strongly opposed a DDOT proposal to install bicycle lanes that would have made it safer for Ward 3 residents to get to school, work, and wherever else (https://anc3b.org/wp-content/uploads/ANC3B-bike-lane-resolution-signed-11-18-21-1.pdf), an argument that they felt the need to bolster by making up things about ANC3D.

Yes, there are NIMBYs in Foxhall and the Palisades. And there are also ample people in those neighborhoods who are sick of their quality of life being adversely affected by half-truths spread by a small number of people who want nothing in their neighborhood to change ever. This thread is good evidence of that. What is your point, exactly?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
"Every workable plan"? Give me a f*ing break. More beggar-thy-neighbor fearmongering, absolutely divorced from the facts.

You got your school, let the kids in Foxhall have theirs.

The main fact here is that no one knows what the catchment area for the new school will be, until DCPS puts it forward. It's also a fact that the money for Stoddert is an expansion in space, but not students. There's no 'you got yours' going on here.

On the 'will split Glover Park and Stoddert' side:
-The number of students for Foxhall doesn't work without the Glover Park kids
-DCPS/CWG 'example' catchment did so
-DCPS/CWG was dishonest about the distance from Glover Park to the new school (hike through the park, not on streets)
-DCPS/CWG defended this catchment at all meetings
-The DCPS/CWG analysis of the proposed schools used this catchment
-Stoddert's renovation money was originally moved to fund the purchase of Foxhall

On the 'will not split Glover Park and Stoddert' side:
-Anonymous CWG members on this board, and CWG members hurling wild personal attacks on listservs, say it won't
-Stoddert had the money for renovation put back in, but it's not an expansion, it just moves students from trailers to a building

Everyone can decide which side is more likely to be right.

So yes, I'm happy for the kids in Foxhall to have a school, don't do it at the expense of Glover Park!

At the CWG, DCPS said there were enough existing DCPS kids living within 1.1 miles of Foxhall to fill the school. So stop your fearmongering, the new school works without Stoddert kids.

And what is this "DCPS/CWG" entity you refer to in four of your bullet points?

CWG included students having to cut through glover park and some who live .1 mi from stoddert.

Enough nonsense. CWG had nothing to do with this map. Someone asked DCPS to put together some possible boundaries. They quickly produced the example map just for illustrative purposes. The example map was panned and they never produced another one, having learned that even a silly response to a request will be used as cannon fodder.

NO BOUNDARIES HAVE BEEN REMOTELY PROPOSED. Stop claiming otherwise Lauren.

where did the # of students within 1.1 mi of the new Foxhall school come from? You need a base map for that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
"Every workable plan"? Give me a f*ing break. More beggar-thy-neighbor fearmongering, absolutely divorced from the facts.

You got your school, let the kids in Foxhall have theirs.

The main fact here is that no one knows what the catchment area for the new school will be, until DCPS puts it forward. It's also a fact that the money for Stoddert is an expansion in space, but not students. There's no 'you got yours' going on here.

On the 'will split Glover Park and Stoddert' side:
-The number of students for Foxhall doesn't work without the Glover Park kids
-DCPS/CWG 'example' catchment did so
-DCPS/CWG was dishonest about the distance from Glover Park to the new school (hike through the park, not on streets)
-DCPS/CWG defended this catchment at all meetings
-The DCPS/CWG analysis of the proposed schools used this catchment
-Stoddert's renovation money was originally moved to fund the purchase of Foxhall

On the 'will not split Glover Park and Stoddert' side:
-Anonymous CWG members on this board, and CWG members hurling wild personal attacks on listservs, say it won't
-Stoddert had the money for renovation put back in, but it's not an expansion, it just moves students from trailers to a building

Everyone can decide which side is more likely to be right.

So yes, I'm happy for the kids in Foxhall to have a school, don't do it at the expense of Glover Park!

At the CWG, DCPS said there were enough existing DCPS kids living within 1.1 miles of Foxhall to fill the school. So stop your fearmongering, the new school works without Stoddert kids.

And what is this "DCPS/CWG" entity you refer to in four of your bullet points?

CWG included students having to cut through glover park and some who live .1 mi from stoddert.

Enough nonsense. CWG had nothing to do with this map. Someone asked DCPS to put together some possible boundaries. They quickly produced the example map just for illustrative purposes. The example map was panned and they never produced another one, having learned that even a silly response to a request will be used as cannon fodder.

NO BOUNDARIES HAVE BEEN REMOTELY PROPOSED. Stop claiming otherwise Lauren.