Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:"The fact of the matter is that the Palisades location meant that only family with the time and means to commute to that location were able to send their kids there--i.e., relatively wealthy families. "
This makes no sense. Only rich people are allowed to drive to Palisades? I've never noticed the signs on MacArthur Blvd, banning people with middle and low incomes. Not to mention, GDS lower and middle school are already located in this high class section of DC - which - when I was a kid, was the last refuge of the now extinct DC redneck.
PP, you really don't understand this? Folks working two jobs, don't have a car, etc would need to jump through multiple hoops to get there. The logistics require time and money and that is what makes it exclusive.
Anonymous wrote:"The fact of the matter is that the Palisades location meant that only family with the time and means to commute to that location were able to send their kids there--i.e., relatively wealthy families. "
This makes no sense. Only rich people are allowed to drive to Palisades? I've never noticed the signs on MacArthur Blvd, banning people with middle and low incomes. Not to mention, GDS lower and middle school are already located in this high class section of DC - which - when I was a kid, was the last refuge of the now extinct DC redneck.
Anonymous wrote:-I don't think that neighbors who purchased property off of Wisconsin near a Metro stop have a right to complain all that much.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:there are lots of schools in nyc that have nothing but their rooftops and a gym for athletic facilities. They are the best day schools in the country, if not the world
Perhaps, but that's not *why* they're good schools. Yes, rooftop space is better than nothing -- if that's the alternative. But it doesn't have to be in this case. Is there any example of an NYC school that started out with a ground-level playing field, then purchased additional land, and subsequently relocated its field to a rooftop? Because that's what's happening here. Putting the L/MS field on the roof didn't start out a necessity. It became even less of a necessity with the acquisition of additional acreage at the Tenleytown campus. But it's happening in order to serve the interests of a developer.
Reasonable people may disagree over whether serving the developer's interests will ultimately serve the school's financial interests. It's an empirical question and probably one where no one with access to all the relevant info will ever have an incentive to produce a honest accounting. But let's not kid ourselves that this land use decision will come at the expense of educational facilities. After devoting over $40 million to land acquisition and asking donors for $50+ million to rebuild the L/MS facilities, GDS will end up with a smaller campus (serving more students) than it started out with.
I agree with you - believe me - I agree with you. GDS missed the boat by failing to secure land when it was available along Foxhall - land that Field and St. Patricks were able to secure. Tragic lack of foresight by the school and its board. However, now the school is stuck and it will have to make the best of the current situation. It is what it is.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:there are lots of schools in nyc that have nothing but their rooftops and a gym for athletic facilities. They are the best day schools in the country, if not the world
Perhaps, but that's not *why* they're good schools. Yes, rooftop space is better than nothing -- if that's the alternative. But it doesn't have to be in this case. Is there any example of an NYC school that started out with a ground-level playing field, then purchased additional land, and subsequently relocated its field to a rooftop? Because that's what's happening here. Putting the L/MS field on the roof didn't start out a necessity. It became even less of a necessity with the acquisition of additional acreage at the Tenleytown campus. But it's happening in order to serve the interests of a developer.
Reasonable people may disagree over whether serving the developer's interests will ultimately serve the school's financial interests. It's an empirical question and probably one where no one with access to all the relevant info will ever have an incentive to produce a honest accounting. But let's not kid ourselves that this land use decision will come at the expense of educational facilities. After devoting over $40 million to land acquisition and asking donors for $50+ million to rebuild the L/MS facilities, GDS will end up with a smaller campus (serving more students) than it started out with.
Anonymous wrote:there are lots of schools in nyc that have nothing but their rooftops and a gym for athletic facilities. They are the best day schools in the country, if not the world