Murch moving to lafayette

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any news on this decision?

Last I heard DCPS will make the decision on the swing space in mid January.

The deadline they said was January 12. They have a lot to do in a short time over a holiday period so I wonder if they will have to push back the date.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any news on this decision?

Last I heard DCPS will make the decision on the swing space in mid January.

The deadline they said was January 12. They have a lot to do in a short time over a holiday period so I wonder if they will have to push back the date.

Hyde has to be relocated now for next two years. Location tbd in January as well...

[Anonymous]

I think there is a method to the DGS madness.

Every month that a swing space plan is known is one more month that parents will complain, second guess, lobby council members/DCPS, etc.

No matter what the decision is, someone will be nervous/unhappy/worried or have a better idea that they can't believe the city hasn't chosen.

I truly think they know what will happen but they delay the announcement of their decision off as long as humanly possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any news on this decision?

Last I heard DCPS will make the decision on the swing space in mid January.

Why should Murch and Lafayette parents be so self-centered so as to deny DCPS the opportunity to save some money, which could used instead in some poor parts of DC? Is a longer commute or more traffic too much of a sacrifice for ONE CITY?!?!

No one is saying cost should not be a factor. Per DGS, using Lafayette is about the same cost as their other options. That was said *before* the cost of bussing students and rehabilitation of the park is considered so it is very likely Lafayette will turn out to be a more expensive option.

Exactly. If the four options, Lafayette is the second-most expensive. To be fair, the cheapest option (swinging entirely onsite) probably isn't feasible. But even when you cut back to three options, Lafayette doesn't stand out as particularly efficient.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Spoken like someone who has never seen Lafayette drop-off and pick-up. There are extremely narrow streets that are also used by commuters going to/from Military Road, Utah Ave., and CT. Ave. The street on which the front entrance of Lafayette will sit is a busy commuter route.

The streets are no wider or narrower than any other residential streets in the city. They are not "extremely narrow" and they are public space, to be used by commuters, school kids and the local residents. If you want to wall it off, move to a gated community in Potomac.

They just want to keep minority kids out of their neighborhood "narrow streets"

[Anonymous]

Lafayette community check your privilege!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Spoken like someone who has never seen Lafayette drop-off and pick-up. There are extremely narrow streets that are also used by commuters going to/from Military Road, Utah Ave., and CT. Ave. The street on which the front entrance of Lafayette will sit is a busy commuter route.

The streets are no wider or narrower than any other residential streets in the city. They are not "extremely narrow" and they are public space, to be used by commuters, school kids and the local residents. If you want to wall it off, move to a gated community in Potomac.

They just want to keep minority kids out of their neighborhood "narrow streets"

Finally somebody who has the intelligence and guts to see the truth!! We all know that the Lafayette community would welcome 700 white kids from Janney to swing for 2 years on their playground with open arms. NOT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Spoken like someone who has never seen Lafayette drop-off and pick-up. There are extremely narrow streets that are also used by commuters going to/from Military Road, Utah Ave., and CT. Ave. The street on which the front entrance of Lafayette will sit is a busy commuter route.

The streets are no wider or narrower than any other residential streets in the city. They are not "extremely narrow" and they are public space, to be used by commuters, school kids and the local residents. If you want to wall it off, move to a gated community in Potomac.

They just want to keep minority kids out of their neighborhood "narrow streets"

Finally somebody who has the intelligence and guts to see the truth!! We all know that the Lafayette community would welcome 700 white kids from Janney to swing for 2 years on their playground with open arms. NOT.

Ha! Awesome. I'm a Murch parent, and I'd say that xenophobia is the last thing driving Lafayette's opposition to this ridiculous idea.

[Anonymous]

Ha! Awesome. I'm a Murch parent, and I'd say that xenophobia is the last thing driving Lafayette's opposition to this ridiculous idea.

And it doesn't take any guts or brains to play the race card here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Spoken like someone who has never seen Lafayette drop-off and pick-up. There are extremely narrow streets that are also used by commuters going to/from Military Road, Utah Ave., and CT. Ave. The street on which the front entrance of Lafayette will sit is a busy commuter route.

The streets are no wider or narrower than any other residential streets in the city. They are not "extremely narrow" and they are public space, to be used by commuters, school kids and the local residents. If you want to wall it off, move to a gated community in Potomac.

which other residential area of the city hosts an elementary school (pre-k to 5th) with 1400 kids?

[Anonymous]

It would be a safety disaster to have 1400 kids on one site. DCPS legal team: get ready for major liability issues!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be a safety disaster to have 1400 kids on one site. DCPS legal team: get ready for major liability issues!

Seriously. Can you imagine?! A lot of kids to be taking a gamble with...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It would be a safety disaster to have 1400 kids on one site. DCPS legal team: get ready for major liability issues!

I am not sure I understand why it would be such a safety disaster. It is a huge space. Even so, it wouldn't be as big of a safety disaster as having 625 on site at Murch during construction, but many parents at Lafayette suggested that would be perfectly reasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It would be a safety disaster to have 1400 kids on one site. DCPS legal team: get ready for major liability issues!

I am not sure I understand why it would be such a safety disaster. It is a huge space. Even so, it wouldn't be as big of a safety disaster as having 625 on site at Murch during construction, but many parents at Lafayette suggested that would be perfectly reasonable.

Murch parent here, and I'd say they are equally unsafe. Have you been in the "huge space" since they built the trailer city? Every square inch is used. The idea of 1400 kids on that site, with all of those trailers up, is a nightmare. Not to mention that the trailers were built to be used for one year, not three--why does anyone have any confidence they'll hold up that long? That the temporary plumbing won't stop working? That they won't start falling apart from wear and tear? And the traffic issue, from a safety perspective, is huge; there is no way to do drop-off and pick-up safely for that many little kids on those streets. It's just not possible (and there's no comparison to be made with Murch-Deal-Wilson, no matter what some parents claim).

Most Lafayette parents I've spoken with understand that swinging Murch totally onsite is not going to work. We should all be focused on finding a solution that is safe and reasonable for all.

[Anonymous]

Apparently a tree fell on Lafayette trailers this week and trailers and walkways have to be repaired. Joint effort from DCPS DGS and DPR to get the area up and running for when school reopens on 1/4