Reply to Low In Boundary at Hearst?

Forum Index » DC Public and Public Charter Schools

Reply to "Low In Boundary at Hearst?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The ranting poster above should recognize that 1) her kids will do just as well in life whether they go to M or H 2) H is growing very quickly in popularity like Ross did and it is good city planning to expand the boundaries. 3) everyone knows that school boundaries can be changed and they have been postulating moving Hearst boundaries for years now. No surprise there. [/quote]

Out of all the families across the city that could have a beef with the DME proposals, the Murch --> Hearst families have the weakest case.[/quote]

Hearst is a fine school, but it is bad city planning to turn 50-75 Murch walkers into 50-75 Hearst drivers. Does anyone really want more cars all trying to turn left on Reno after drop off every morning during the commute? Think about it. This impacts more than schools.[/quote]

As someone who lives near the northern edge of the Hearst boundary, certainly for a few blocks you would still be walkers, or could be.  Murch, quite frankly, is close to Hearst.  But I get that your walk (or the future you's walk) would be farther, especially for those very close to Murch, and I'd be annoyed by that too.  I don't think it will be that compelling an argument for the boundary process, but it is a perfectly reasonable one to make.

My bet is that in the end they move the boundary shift back down to say Albemarle or Alton, and then turn around and move the Hearst border north on the other side of Connecticut.  Either way, Murch's size is not sustainable.  Similarly, I suspect that they will keep the small piece of Janney near that school at Janney, and instead shift a portion on the other side of Wisconsin.  I feel a little for the boundary planners.  Murch and Janney have boundaries that are a little "pie-shaped" with the wide part near the DC/MD border and the points close together; and it is the points that are the ones close to Hearst, hence switching families that are close to the other schools.

As far as the impact on traffic goes, again I suspect that many families in those areas will still walk or not have to drive far, and in contrast, fewer OOB families will be driving across the park.  On net, traffic in the city will be improved.[/quote]

Families with little ones are not going to walk from Alton to Hearst. And I wouldn't let my 5th grader walk alone that stretch because of the Reno traffic and few lights (but I would from Alton to Murch). If you want to shrink Murch it makes more sense to shift the northern border to send more to Lafayette. Growing Hearst is trickier but I agree with PP that making it a choice rather than a forced move is better for the community. A lot of people on Yuma, Alton, etc. bought there to go to Murch and we are mad to have the rug pulled from under us.[/quote]

I walk with a preschool kid (who walks... well most of the time) from the Tenleytown metro to Hearst, not quite as far North but farther west.  It will be just fine.

If you think that shifting Murch to Lafayette would make sense but Murch to Hearst would not, what is the basis or principles are you using for such a shift?  And how would shift kids from one overcrowded school to another any help to the system?[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics