Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get is that, regardless of who owns it, the old Volvo dealership building is coming down and the big parking lot will be developed. It's ridiculous to think that a piece of vacant land along a major thoroughfare is going to sit there undeveloped, even if the parking lot is beloved by the neighborhood. Is the goal of the neighbors to make the zoning process on the volvo lot so onerous that GDS drops its plan? And if that happens, what do you think will happen next? Won't it sell the land to a major developer that will have even bigger plans for it, and not give a hoot about the neighbors? And likely be willing to play whatever awful game developers play to get things approved. Am I missing something?

See Cleveland Park - they fought it under the fig lead of wanting an "historically accurate" Giant and ended up with Cathedral Commons.

The most uninspired, generic, "meh" town center on the planet.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure, you wouldn't hear it in those contexts (or from teachers). Fundraising, campus consolidation, HS course offerings, discipline, extra-curriculars, and admissions are the contexts in which I've heard parents and administrators bring Sidwell up.

Campus consolidation - come on. Many schools on one campus were mentioned - Maret, NCS, Sidwell, StA. Please.

GDS's consolidation was originally touted as a way to gain a competitive advantage over Sidwell specifically. Obviously, it wouldn't have given us an edge over Maret or the Cathedral Schools, each of which already had a single campus (or close to it). Nor did anyone claim that GDS had been losing students to Maret or STA/NCS over our split campus set-up. And no one mentioned WIS as a (two campus) school GDS would compete more successfully with if it consolidated. It really was all about Sidwell for some advocates. Sounds foolish now because Sidwell will consolidate faster and cheaper, with much less disruption and much more space than GDS will -- but that was one of the big selling points for the project at the time the land sales wereammpunced.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get is that, regardless of who owns it, the old Volvo dealership building is coming down and the big parking lot will be developed. It's ridiculous to think that a piece of vacant land along a major thoroughfare is going to sit there undeveloped, even if the parking lot is beloved by the neighborhood. Is the goal of the neighbors to make the zoning process on the volvo lot so onerous that GDS drops its plan? And if that happens, what do you think will happen next? Won't it sell the land to a major developer that will have even bigger plans for it, and not give a hoot about the neighbors? And likely be willing to play whatever awful game developers play to get things approved. Am I missing something?

Yes.

If I understand correctly, GDS proposed transferring unused floorspace from the school site to the commercial site, so they aimed to build something bigger on the commercial site than would be allowable to a developer who owned the commercial site only.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure, you wouldn't hear it in those contexts (or from teachers). Fundraising, campus consolidation, HS course offerings, discipline, extra-curriculars, and admissions are the contexts in which I've heard parents and administrators bring Sidwell up.

Campus consolidation - come on. Many schools on one campus were mentioned - Maret, NCS, Sidwell, StA. Please.

Anonymous wrote:GDS's team included Bowser cronies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get is that, regardless of who owns it, the old Volvo dealership building is coming down and the big parking lot will be developed. It's ridiculous to think that a piece of vacant land along a major thoroughfare is going to sit there undeveloped, even if the parking lot is beloved by the neighborhood. Is the goal of the neighbors to make the zoning process on the volvo lot so onerous that GDS drops its plan? And if that happens, what do you think will happen next? Won't it sell the land to a major developer that will have even bigger plans for it, and not give a hoot about the neighbors? And likely be willing to play whatever awful game developers play to get things approved. Am I missing something?

See Cleveland Park - they fought it under the fig lead of wanting an "historically accurate" Giant and ended up with Cathedral Commons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How recently did your kid graduate? I would have agreed with you 10 years ago re GDS's relationship with/rhetoric re Sidwell, but things have changed since then.

What about the refrain that the Obamas didn't really choose Sidwell over GDS? That they really wanted GDS as a first choice/Michelle loved her GDS visit/just so impressed with GDS social justice history/Eric Holder recommended GDS, etc., etc., ... but the Secret Service threw up security concerns about traffic at the Macarthur campus and so in the end the Obamas reluctantly followed the Clintons' path to Sidwell.

Anonymous wrote:What I don't get is that, regardless of who owns it, the old Volvo dealership building is coming down and the big parking lot will be developed. It's ridiculous to think that a piece of vacant land along a major thoroughfare is going to sit there undeveloped, even if the parking lot is beloved by the neighborhood. Is the goal of the neighbors to make the zoning process on the volvo lot so onerous that GDS drops its plan? And if that happens, what do you think will happen next? Won't it sell the land to a major developer that will have even bigger plans for it, and not give a hoot about the neighbors? And likely be willing to play whatever awful game developers play to get things approved. Am I missing something?

Anonymous wrote:Sure, you wouldn't hear it in those contexts (or from teachers). Fundraising, campus consolidation, HS course offerings, discipline, extra-curriculars, and admissions are the contexts in which I've heard parents and administrators bring Sidwell up.

Anonymous wrote:I think GDS is learning that talk is cheap. You can talk all you want about diversity and inclusion -- both the worthiest of goals -- but making it happen requires more than talk. It is hard work. I think other schools in the area that may not seem as progressive do a better job with diversity and inclusion than GDS does.

A parent I know with children at GDS and Sidwell once said. GDS talks all the time about how they are better than Sidwell, but Sidwell never talks about GDS. I feel that someone in leadership at GDS has a chip on their shoulder about not being Sidwell. It's too bad. I think the ill-advised expansion/development project is driven by that competition as is the desire pretend everything is fine. Every school has issues; the best schools are honest about them and confront them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm only posting on this so that whoever reads this lame thread hears from a parent who is happy at GDS. GDS has been a great school, and continues to be one for my family. If it's not right for you, then you have the right to leave the school--and you should. Please go. Right now you're hiding your vitriol behind your online anonymity. Get a life. Go on summer vacation and then I (and many parents who are sick of the small number of parents trying to crap talk the school) ask you to please, please take your family and go to a different school.

Be careful what you wish for... Imagine the school with little or no diversity. I guess it would be a JDS in DC. I guess that is your desired result.

Anonymous wrote:GDS got too big and for long has tried to be a more diverse/progressive version of Sidwell. Honestly, this new development idea is stupid and a waste of time and money.

Private school as real estate developer=bad mix