Murch renovation

[Anonymous]

They probably need to demolish and rebuild from scratch given the small plot of land.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:this is every taxpayers business because DCPS doesn't seem to have any plan, whatsoever.

Well said

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They probably need to demolish and rebuild from scratch given the small plot of land.

If allowed, that is a good idea, because the old building is a health hazard with poorly planned space and it is not even remotely ADA compliant.

[Anonymous]

Not possible because the old building has been deemed historic and so historic preservation board gets to okay or reject all plans. Including how the new building would affect light on the old one.
The back of the building is not as protected and one possibity may be to demo the gym and build down there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The part that amazed me were the people from the neighborhood who want to delay the remodel for years because they don't feel that the neighbors have been informed or made aware of the renovations. They were SHOCKED to find out that a renovation was being planned.

I am a neighbor who lives directly across from Murch and we are a long time Murch family. There are a few misconceptions/issues here:
1. Neighbors were not notified of the meeting, the current plan or anything, unless they found out about it as current families. But DC (ngs?) are supposed to specifically notify and have a meeting with the homes directly affected (aka in the envelope) and they did not. No one wAs shocked sbout a renovation but it's been a topic for at least 5 years .

2. Murch has needed renovation and space for many many years. There was definitely a group of current families who seem to be ready to give up many things in order to have the Renovation done while their kids can benefit from it. The main complaint/concern with the renovation is related to the lack of playground/green space/courts/field. This will affect the neighbors and neighborhood FOREVER and we should not settle for a terrible design which ruins the neighborhood communal/community center. It is very shortsighted to give it up.

3. The man who spoke and who was going on about his experience as a Murch family years ago and who went on About a new elementary school definitely does NOT represent the majority neighborhood, but his point of lack of notification from DGS was right.

4. The current design is awful and ruins a core for the neighborhood (which many people from outside the neighborhood use on off hours as well). I bet st least 75% of kids using the playground learned to bike or scooter on the bluetop. I bet many Murch grade come back and use the basketball court and soccer field. The plans now don't even have a playground.
This is also an enormous issue for the running of the school-700 kids will not be able to play, run, and get out and move during recess, even if they go out in groups of 200 at a time there won't be enough space.

5. There are huge problems and limits with the space but no representation of any creative solutions were presented in the plan.

To be clear-the neighborhood and neighbors are part of the Murch community. No one wants to stop or stall but we want it done with thought and consideration for the role that Murch plays in an ongoing way for Murch families, past, present, and future. That means in large part not destroying and doing away with play space for all. We need to all work together to demand DGS and the architects present us with plans that work for all kids.

I think the bolded part is a misunderstanding, or at least it doesn't represent my position. Honestly, it would be easier/better for my family if the renovation got delayed by four years so we didn't have to deal with it, as we'll get almost no personal benefit. But what's best for the school and the community is for it to happen soon and not risk losing funds by fighting likely losing battles with the historical preservation office and the NPS.

And I think people at the meeting reacted pretty hysterically about the playground/space issue. There will still be significant playspace--yes, less than current, but still more running around room than Eaton has, for example--and it seems as though NPS will allows a playground to be built on it.

All of that said, I think DC has done a terrible job communicating about this, especially with the non-school surrounding community, and I do believe there's a better solution than what is currently on the table. But we won't get there by fighting unwinnable battles, like the seeming desire of many to just tear the current building down and start over.

If we're going to take on long-shot battles, it should be with DCPS, which left Murch with a projected student count of 700. That's what's driving all of these problems.

[Anonymous]

The boundary issue is a fair amount of BS because all the schools to which kids can be moved are also crowded - or far away - except for Hearst for some families. For example. Jamey is slightly closer to us than Murch, and Janney would be more convenient for us, but moving us the would not solve any overcrowding issues. Moving us to Hearst might -- but we would be passing Murch and Janney on our way there. So much fior a neighborhood school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former Murch parent here: I always thought any new plan would need to go up or go down. Parking can be underground and an addition can be four floors to the side without losing the bluetop - 3 up and one below the ground. This is really a lousy design and just plops a school on the open space.

I was involved in the last iteration of the playground. $1M of taxpayers money. What a waste not to think that space through in a more sensitive way.

I agree, it was amazing to me, as a close neighbor, how fast that playground space got erased with trailers and teacher parking. I may be off a tad, but I'm almost sure there was one new trailer the very next school year following completion and a 2nd trailer the next year. Now there's, what? 5 trailers? on the new "play space."

Clearly you haven't been to Murch in years. The "new play space" is still there. The two trailers first to come took up no "play space" - they were put into the open area where cars parked. The trailers that came last year again took up no "play space" but more of the parking. Come on by to enjoy the play space before the city deems it unnecessary for the school and city.

[Anonymous]

There is basically no playspace, or playground at all, on the sketch on the link.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The boundary issue is a fair amount of BS because all the schools to which kids can be moved are also crowded - or far away - except for Hearst for some families. For example. Jamey is slightly closer to us than Murch, and Janney would be more convenient for us, but moving us the would not solve any overcrowding issues. Moving us to Hearst might -- but we would be passing Murch and Janney on our way there. So much fior a neighborhood school.

When folks say overcrowding they mean both these schools - but also Deal and Wilson where all these kids (IB and OOB) now have the right to go.

[Anonymous]

Any chance that the city could reserve some of the street parking for the staff's use?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Any chance that the city could reserve some of the street parking for the staff's use?

That is what they currently do since the latest trailers took up most of the parking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any chance that the city could reserve some of the street parking for the staff's use?

That is what they currently do since the latest trailers took up most of the parking.

At Hearst the IB families lend the teachers their temporary parking passes. Maybe Murch families could do the same?

[Anonymous]

They changed the zone signage on the streets surrounding Murch and the teachers have a pass for that. This happened last summer and there haven't been any parking issues this year.

[Anonymous]

Sounds like Murch has a lot of big issues at the moment - overcrowding, the renovation, boundaries, all of which are legit. I know it's a lot to take on, but I wonder if there is some way to fight these issues some other way? Maybe not, or maybe it's already been done, but it has appeared for the last 2 years that Murch has been doing a lot of loud complaining. There are so many issues at DCPS, I wonder if maybe Murch's complaining is starting to just sound like noise? Just a thought. Maybe there is some other way to rationally approach this?

[Anonymous]

This thread is so depressing. We love the Murch neighborhood(s) but decided not to move inbounds for Murch because of the overcrowding and uncertainty around the renovation.