GDS parents, this thread is clearly the work of a developer who would love to get him/her hands on the Martens site and has a vested interested in blocking the school's plans. Let him take his issues and alternatives up with the City and see how far he goes. Don't waste your time engaging her. It only serves to feed his meme that there's an outpouring of opposition to GDS.

1) At least two proposals over the years to develop Martins. One in 2003 was about the same size as GDS. One in 2013 was five or six stories - so smaller

2) Nobody is saying developers are not interested in the site. People are saying that developers are using GDS to speed the process for getting a bigger building and more profits.

3) GDS has said that it wants revenue from the building to constrain tuition for people who can afford to pay full price and increase financial aid for those who can't afford full price. (non-profits still care about making money)

Anonymous wrote:Two 90 foot residential buildings on the Martens site is significantly more development than any developer has ever proposed for the Martens site. To the extent that developers are interested in this project, it's because they think that GDS's involvement will lower their costs and increase the scale at which they can build. And GDS wants a revenue source which means the project has to be that much MORE profitable than what a developer could build on his own. Meanwhile the population of the campus doubles.

The three assertions bolded above are questionable at best.
1. What other development has ever been proposed for the Martens site before GDS bought it? None, so of course the proposal is more development than any developer has ever proposed.
2. Here you seem to be saying that without GDS involvement this site would not be of interest to developers - surely you jest! A block from the metro? This site will be built out to the max by any developer that breathes. GDS will inevitably constrain developers and thus increase the developers costs or reduce their returns.
3. Why would GDS need to make more profit than a developer could on his own? GDS is a non-profit with a revenue stream from tuition, unlike developers.

Anonymous wrote:
That's fine, but you cannot speak for those of us close to Wisconsin Ave who fear not "drop offs" but way too many new residents who will 1. have a car but 2. won't have onsite parking so they plop it in front of your driveway for 16 days at a time without moving it. (because they otherwise do take Metro, but hell, the car is paid for so why not keep it for weekends ...)

Multiply that times 100. It's a drag, and that's wholly independent of how much or little you as a parent care about rooftop vs. turf playing fields.

The bolded is quite a red herring, don't you think? Parking permits are for those who live in the neighborhood, whose kids would walk or be dropped off.

GDS families come from (and that this may be true at all income levels), but won't make the school affordable to significantly more people (just different ones ).

Actually, depending on where you live/work, the Metro commute to Tenleytown could be more time-consuming and expensive than the car commute to Palisades. And there are probably more affordable and larger apartments along MacArthur than there are along upper Wisconsin Ave.

The HS is already Metro-accessible. Is it substantially more economically diverse than GDS's L/MS? Conversely, has location proven a dealbreaker for lower income families at Our Lady of Victory (K-8 parochial school a few blocks north of GDS's MacArthur campus)?

My sense is that consolidation may change where

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No I dont. GDS already has 600 kids in the Palisades. Tuition is already 35k+ a year. GDS alumni road the D-4 and the D-6 to attend high school when it was located at the current River School. In addition to GDS, there are several other private schools in the palisades neighborhood. You don't want to admit GDS missed an important opportunity to secure land in a more logical area for the future of the school, but them'so the facts. Now the school is in a unfortunate situation with its campus. IF it doesn't consolidate, it will be hemmed in by commercial construction.

Families who live in lower income neighborhoods generally don't have the luxury of time or money to commute to a non-metro accessible area. That's a fact. As you point out, the majority of families who are at GDS LS/MS currently are able to afford the astronomical tuition. The other private schools in the area also have very wealthy families--St. Pats has a hard time attracting lower income families because of the logistics. Field has a school bus. Blessed Sacrament is parochial, so subsidized by the Catholic Church. BTW, GDS alum who went to River were also overwhelming dropped of by parents.

Anonymous wrote:The prior poster discussed parking issues which really do not have a whole lot to do with the proposal. I would be more concerned about the traffic than parking, but I don't live there, will just be driving there 3-5 times a day.

You will be driving from suburbs, no doubt, which is why you appear to have no concept of surface parking scarcity.

The number of housing units sought by GDS, by way of its chosen developer, will directly affect surrounding residents' parking situation. 10:11 summed it up well.

The prior poster discussed parking issues which really do not have a whole lot to do with the proposal. I would be more concerned about the traffic than parking, but I don't live there, will just be driving there 3-5 times a day.

Two 90 foot residential buildings on the Martens site is significantly more development than any developer has ever proposed for the Martens site. To the extent that developers are interested in this project, it's because they think that GDS's involvement will lower their costs and increase the scale at which they can build. And GDS wants a revenue source which means the project has to be that much MORE profitable than what a developer could build on his own. Meanwhile the population of the campus doubles. You're kidding yourself if you think this is a better outcome for the neighbors.

Whether it's good for GDS is a separate question, but one really worth looking at. In the end, though, people will self-select and the school will change accordingly. Expect major fundraising pushes for the next decade. And for the first wave of construction to yield the essentials (replacement of existing facilities). "Bell and whistles" will be largely held back to create a platform for yet another round of appeals once the new campus falls short of peoples' fantasies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I doubt you know the opinions of every GDS family in those zip codes. That's before we get to the question of how many people who are thrilled with the project now (based on hype and the promise of a single drop-off) will suffer a rude awakening once it's built. Wait and see is good advice for familiies not already at the school. Pay more attention, think critically, and ask questions is probably better advice for GDS families.

I certainly don't know every family in those zip codes, or the opinion of every family I do know in those zip codes. But what I said was that of the people who live in those zip codes whose opinion on the consolidation I do know (which is a lot!) they are uniformly excited.

That's fine, but you cannot speak for those of us close to Wisconsin Ave who fear not "drop offs" but way too many new residents who will 1. have a car but 2. won't have onsite parking so they plop it in front of your driveway for 16 days at a time without moving it. (because they otherwise do take Metro, but hell, the car is paid for so why not keep it for weekends ...)

Multiply that times 100. It's a drag, and that's wholly independent of how much or little you as a parent care about rooftop vs. turf playing fields.

I get this - BUT this is not a GDS issue, it is a re-development issue. There will be parking under all the buildings and it is my understanding that in these situations the city wont issue residential zoning permits to building residents. Any development of the safeway/martens property will bring in more . At least with GDS buying this property it will mostly be used as a school with a ton of underground parking and a ton of incentive to play well with neighbors.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I doubt you know the opinions of every GDS family in those zip codes. That's before we get to the question of how many people who are thrilled with the project now (based on hype and the promise of a single drop-off) will suffer a rude awakening once it's built. Wait and see is good advice for familiies not already at the school. Pay more attention, think critically, and ask questions is probably better advice for GDS families.

I certainly don't know every family in those zip codes, or the opinion of every family I do know in those zip codes. But what I said was that of the people who live in those zip codes whose opinion on the consolidation I do know (which is a lot!) they are uniformly excited.

That's fine, but you cannot speak for those of us close to Wisconsin Ave who fear not "drop offs" but way too many new residents who will 1. have a car but 2. won't have onsite parking so they plop it in front of your driveway for 16 days at a time without moving it. (because they otherwise do take Metro, but hell, the car is paid for so why not keep it for weekends ...)

Multiply that times 100. It's a drag, and that's wholly independent of how much or little you as a parent care about rooftop vs. turf playing fields.

Anonymous wrote:I doubt you know the opinions of every GDS family in those zip codes. That's before we get to the question of how many people who are thrilled with the project now (based on hype and the promise of a single drop-off) will suffer a rude awakening once it's built. Wait and see is good advice for familiies not already at the school. Pay more attention, think critically, and ask questions is probably better advice for GDS families.

I certainly don't know every family in those zip codes, or the opinion of every family I do know in those zip codes. But what I said was that of the people who live in those zip codes whose opinion on the consolidation I do know (which is a lot!) they are uniformly excited.

I doubt you know the opinions of every GDS family in those zip codes. That's before we get to the question of how many people who are thrilled with the project now (based on hype and the promise of a single drop-off) will suffer a rude awakening once it's built. Wait and see is good advice for familiies not already at the school. Pay more attention, think critically, and ask questions is probably better advice for GDS families.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

No I dont. GDS already has 600 kids in the Palisades. Tuition is already 35k+ a year. GDS alumni road the D-4 and the D-6 to attend high school when it was located at the current River School. In addition to GDS, there are several other private schools in the palisades neighborhood. You don't want to admit GDS missed an important opportunity to secure land in a more logical area for the future of the school, but them'so the facts. Now the school is in a unfortunate situation with its campus. IF it doesn't consolidate, it will be hemmed in by commercial construction.

If you don't have a kid at the school, I cannot understand why you would care about this at all. If you are thinking about sending a kid to GDS, then wait until the building is completed and make a judgment then. I (and pretty much every GDS family I know who lives in my zip code 20008, plus 20015 and 20016, which make up a really large chunk of the school) am THRILLED the school is not located on foxhall where Field is. I am an alum with three kids at GDS and this consolidation is ideal for my family. I HATE HATE HATE schlepping to the palisades for school events, etc. I could give a crap whether the field is on the roof - as long as the classrooms get light and there is some type of guard rail in place so that my kids can't accidentally fall off the field, walking up a few flights of stairs to get to the field is literally no different than walking a few hundred yards to get to the field. For bigger school events, the high school field is on ground level.