Murch- Getting screwed again?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DGS won't need a relocation plan because the project will probably be delayed given this shortfall.

I secretly think this too.

Because if they wait long enough the families who are involved will go away either by moving or because their kids matriculate to middle school. Sad.

There are people involved who don't even have kids. No one is going away. This is a community issue, not just a parents with young kids issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm not going to talk about schools with 30 million dollar atriums and second floor kilns, but I will make the suggestion one more time to the DC community:

GIVE TEACHERS RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERMITS that allow them to park near the schools they serve. Murch is a perfect example of how this would work well--and cheaper than building your underground parking garage and losing your preK playground.

Janney has underground parking and pre-K. Why should Murch have to choose just because it's getting the leftovers after many other schools have gorged themselves?

Giving teachers free RPP permits to park in residential areas near schools sounds appealing, but it raises questions: First, it encourages more driving when other public policies are to encourage transit use, ride sharing, etc. Granted some teachers may have no choice but to drive, but handing out free RPP passes will just encourage more car use. Second, if teachers get free RPPs, who else "deserves" them? The school custodians? Why not. Cops? Sure. Fire fighters? Absolutely. Sanitation workers? Uh, well. DMV bureaucrats? Maybe not. And for residents who live in the vicinity of a school, etc. where employees have free street parking will find that the RPP program no longer works for them as they have to park blocks from their homes. So the best solution is to provide on-site (underground if possible) parking and then control (or require a needs based showing) for employees who get the parking. And charge them something for using it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did Bowser win the precincts in the Murch district in 2014? I doubt it, and so when it comes to decisions on how to allocate scarcer and scarcer school renovation funds, she's going to favor projects either in (or primarily serving) the areas where she racked up a lot of support.

In the primary Gray won the eastern part of the city and Bowser won the western part. In the general it flipped and Catania won the western part and Bowser the eastern. Most Murch parents probably voted for Bowser in the primary and Catania in the general.

[Anonymous]

Teacher parking is required by the union contract. The Murch site is not big enough to provide it without going underground. Going underground is expensive -- hence the latest DGS/DCPS effort not to do so at the expense of all of the facilities planned to go underground. Please lets keep focused on how the larger community can help current and future Murch families ensure that the renovation is one that includes common sense elements: a cafeteria, a gym that can actually accommodate the whole school, a modern library and a playground where 7 grades can play and exercise safely. Doesn't seem like a lot to ask -- and yet.... We could certainly use the support of any DC resident that is similarly seeking renovation or has completed or is nearing completion of the process.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teacher parking is required by the union contract. The Murch site is not big enough to provide it without going underground. Going underground is expensive -- hence the latest DGS/DCPS effort not to do so at the expense of all of the facilities planned to go underground. Please lets keep focused on how the larger community can help current and future Murch families ensure that the renovation is one that includes common sense elements: a cafeteria, a gym that can actually accommodate the whole school, a modern library and a playground where 7 grades can play and exercise safely. Doesn't seem like a lot to ask -- and yet.... We could certainly use the support of any DC resident that is similarly seeking renovation or has completed or is nearing completion of the process.

The parking is a zoning requirement and the design provides the barest minimum parking required by zoning. The teacher's contract has nothing to do with it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then when you think about what DCPS has sunk into Ellington and Dunbar, you come to the conclusion that Bowser and DCPS hate young non-poor children.

Most of those decisions predate Bowser; it's the old "Chocolate City" Democrat machine in action. Now personified in Bowser.

What would it take for a more capable and inclusive leader to win DC's Democratic primary next time?

Bowser was on the Council, so she is not blameless.

I think Catania would have been more capable and inclusive.

But he was running as an Independent. We need someone able to win the Democratic primary.

Or, as some PPs pointed earlier, a good lawsuit against the city.

No taxation without representation.

Why not start by dragging Mary Cheh to an urgent meeting with Murch parents, and demanding that $10 million be shaved from Duke Ellington's "bling palace" project and re-allocated to Murch?! What would be a modest cut for Ellington (currently about a $200 million renovation and still climbing ) would mean a very significant difference to Murch.

Sure.

Additionally, if I were a Murch parent, I'd mobilize neighbors and work with lawyers to find ways to pay lower property taxes, and fund the Munch renovation directly.

Very Trump-esque.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And then when you think about what DCPS has sunk into Ellington and Dunbar, you come to the conclusion that Bowser and DCPS hate young non-poor children.

Most of those decisions predate Bowser; it's the old "Chocolate City" Democrat machine in action. Now personified in Bowser.

What would it take for a more capable and inclusive leader to win DC's Democratic primary next time?

Bowser was on the Council, so she is not blameless.

I think Catania would have been more capable and inclusive.

But he was running as an Independent. We need someone able to win the Democratic primary.

Or, as some PPs pointed earlier, a good lawsuit against the city.

No taxation without representation.

Why not start by dragging Mary Cheh to an urgent meeting with Murch parents, and demanding that $10 million be shaved from Duke Ellington's "bling palace" project and re-allocated to Murch?! What would be a modest cut for Ellington (currently about a $200 million renovation and still climbing ) would mean a very significant difference to Murch.

Sure.

Additionally, if I were a Murch parent, I'd mobilize neighbors and work with lawyers to find ways to pay lower property taxes, and fund the Munch renovation directly.

Very Trump-esque.

Will the neighbors in the attendance zone try to force OOB families to pay tuition or put a collection box at the entrance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teacher parking is required by the union contract. The Murch site is not big enough to provide it without going underground. Going underground is expensive -- hence the latest DGS/DCPS effort not to do so at the expense of all of the facilities planned to go underground. Please lets keep focused on how the larger community can help current and future Murch families ensure that the renovation is one that includes common sense elements: a cafeteria, a gym that can actually accommodate the whole school, a modern library and a playground where 7 grades can play and exercise safely. Doesn't seem like a lot to ask -- and yet.... We could certainly use the support of any DC resident that is similarly seeking renovation or has completed or is nearing completion of the process.

The parking is a zoning requirement and the design provides the barest minimum parking required by zoning. The teacher's contract has nothing to do with it.

You both are right. But notice that DCPS did not say they are getting rid of the parking. DCPS doesn't care about the teacher contract but they don't want to hassle with a zoning variance, which calls for 45-55 spaces for a building this size. They are simply not putting it as far underground as the feasibility study concluded was the only way to fit a school with this large of an enrollment on such a small site. Remember, the city can't build on one third of the Murch site because it is National Park Service land, part of Fort Reno. The only thing that can go on that large swath of the property is play space. The addition will go where the current soccer field & basketball courts & trailers are. The parking is supposed to go under the addition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DGS won't need a relocation plan because the project will probably be delayed given this shortfall.

The school as it is is in appalling snd unsafe condition. It's impossible to put the reno off any longer - somebody will get hurt and then the city will be facing a lawsuit instead. DCPS and DGS need to step up and follow through on the commitment they have made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teacher parking is required by the union contract. The Murch site is not big enough to provide it without going underground. Going underground is expensive -- hence the latest DGS/DCPS effort not to do so at the expense of all of the facilities planned to go underground. Please lets keep focused on how the larger community can help current and future Murch families ensure that the renovation is one that includes common sense elements: a cafeteria, a gym that can actually accommodate the whole school, a modern library and a playground where 7 grades can play and exercise safely. Doesn't seem like a lot to ask -- and yet.... We could certainly use the support of any DC resident that is similarly seeking renovation or has completed or is nearing completion of the process.

Where do we sign up to get a cafeteria and gymnasium that can accommodate the entirety of our school, which is at capacity, as well as a modern library, playground, soccer field and basketball court? Doesn't seem like alot to ask.

[Anonymous]

I am a Murch parent and sent my letter letting them know how incompetent they all are. This is ridiculous. My kid is in 1st grade and I don't even think any more he'll see the renovated school. This city is a joke.

[Anonymous]

What must it be like to be an employee of Murch and to have your concerns fall on deaf ears because of the ineptness of DCPS/DGS. What other schools over 700 students in DCPS don't have a separate cafeteria and gym? Why start the inequities now in a system that is screaming for more equity among ALL schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Teacher parking is required by the union contract. The Murch site is not big enough to provide it without going underground. Going underground is expensive -- hence the latest DGS/DCPS effort not to do so at the expense of all of the facilities planned to go underground. Please lets keep focused on how the larger community can help current and future Murch families ensure that the renovation is one that includes common sense elements: a cafeteria, a gym that can actually accommodate the whole school, a modern library and a playground where 7 grades can play and exercise safely. Doesn't seem like a lot to ask -- and yet.... We could certainly use the support of any DC resident that is similarly seeking renovation or has completed or is nearing completion of the process.

Why the heck would DCPS agree to parking in the union contract when the official policies being pushed by DDOT and the Office of Planning is to reduce reliance on car transportation, which includes reducing off-street parking? This is a prime example of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, and all of these departments report up through the mayor. If DCPS had balls, they'd tell the union to stuff it on the parking -- or give them the choice of a modernized school with all the bells and whistles or off-street parking. BTW, I find it hard to believe that the contract really requires parking. John Eaton, for example, has no parking spaces and the school is surrounded by residential zoned parking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teacher parking is required by the union contract. The Murch site is not big enough to provide it without going underground. Going underground is expensive -- hence the latest DGS/DCPS effort not to do so at the expense of all of the facilities planned to go underground. Please lets keep focused on how the larger community can help current and future Murch families ensure that the renovation is one that includes common sense elements: a cafeteria, a gym that can actually accommodate the whole school, a modern library and a playground where 7 grades can play and exercise safely. Doesn't seem like a lot to ask -- and yet.... We could certainly use the support of any DC resident that is similarly seeking renovation or has completed or is nearing completion of the process.

The parking is a zoning requirement and the design provides the barest minimum parking required by zoning. The teacher's contract has nothing to do with it.

You both are right. But notice that DCPS did not say they are getting rid of the parking. DCPS doesn't care about the teacher contract but they don't want to hassle with a zoning variance, which calls for 45-55 spaces for a building this size. They are simply not putting it as far underground as the feasibility study concluded was the only way to fit a school with this large of an enrollment on such a small site. Remember, the city can't build on one third of the Murch site because it is National Park Service land, part of Fort Reno. The only thing that can go on that large swath of the property is play space. The addition will go where the current soccer field & basketball courts & trailers are. The parking is supposed to go under the addition.

It does seem kinda nuts that DCPS has let Murch get as large as it has. They should drastically throttle back any OOB enrollment as those student graduate and then shift more of the local school population to Hardy. This would have the effect of flipping Hardy overnight to a majority IB/neighborhood school, which the community would welcome. A win-win.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Teacher parking is required by the union contract. The Murch site is not big enough to provide it without going underground. Going underground is expensive -- hence the latest DGS/DCPS effort not to do so at the expense of all of the facilities planned to go underground. Please lets keep focused on how the larger community can help current and future Murch families ensure that the renovation is one that includes common sense elements: a cafeteria, a gym that can actually accommodate the whole school, a modern library and a playground where 7 grades can play and exercise safely. Doesn't seem like a lot to ask -- and yet.... We could certainly use the support of any DC resident that is similarly seeking renovation or has completed or is nearing completion of the process.

The parking is a zoning requirement and the design provides the barest minimum parking required by zoning. The teacher's contract has nothing to do with it.

You both are right. But notice that DCPS did not say they are getting rid of the parking. DCPS doesn't care about the teacher contract but they don't want to hassle with a zoning variance, which calls for 45-55 spaces for a building this size. They are simply not putting it as far underground as the feasibility study concluded was the only way to fit a school with this large of an enrollment on such a small site. Remember, the city can't build on one third of the Murch site because it is National Park Service land, part of Fort Reno. The only thing that can go on that large swath of the property is play space. The addition will go where the current soccer field & basketball courts & trailers are. The parking is supposed to go under the addition.

It does seem kinda nuts that DCPS has let Murch get as large as it has. They should drastically throttle back any OOB enrollment as those student graduate and then shift more of the local school population to Hardy. This would have the effect of flipping Hardy overnight to a majority IB/neighborhood school, which the community would welcome. A win-win.

Typo: wrote 'Hardy' but meant Phoebe Hearst!