Anonymous wrote:Oh dear, what a bunch of sour kangaroos... The materials are more natural. The slides are still there. The climbing rope structure is awesome. The car has been replaced by a... rocket! And the spinning seats are really fun (for me too). My 4-year-old loves it, as do the big kids.

Ugh, my pet peeve is that making kids playgrounds all beiges and browns and greens somehow makes it more attractive or more natural. Ridiculous. It's one thing if it's in the middle of a big park and you're trying to keep the overall natural aesthetic, but in the middle of the city beige/green/brown doesn't fit into the surroundings anyway. Why not make it visually interesting or bright and playful or something that's actually kid-like. The material in the old playground wasn't more toxic because it wasn't bland.

Anonymous wrote:The no shade issue probably stems from wanting to prevent homeless people or other non-play persons from hanging out there.

Well, it also makes kids and families not want to hang out there.

The no shade issue probably stems from wanting to prevent homeless people or other non-play persons from hanging out there.

Anonymous wrote:Yes- you must be referring to Marie Reed. Don't get me started on that new playground (the main one, not the PK one). Who designs a playground in DC with literally zero shade? That playground is unimaginably hot on DC spring/summer days.

This is par for the course, almost none of the DC newer playground s have any shade. It’s ridiculous.

Unlikely

Really? Was there neighborhood approval/input?

Anonymous wrote:PP, you seem to have a lot of knowledge. The playground replacement didn’t happen overnight. It’s been in the works for at least two years. You might have contacted the school with this viral information when the process began.

+ 1. As one of the few playgrounds in the center of the city, Ross is heavily used during all daylight hours, especially weekends. Glad it got an upgrade.

PP, you seem to have a lot of knowledge. The playground replacement didn’t happen overnight. It’s been in the works for at least two years. You might have contacted the school with this viral information when the process began.

‘Oh dear, what a bunch of sour kangaroos... The materials are more natural. The slides are still there. The climbing rope structure is awesome. The car has been replaced by a... rocket! And the spinning seats are really fun (for me too). My 4-year-old loves it, as do the big kids.’

My complaint re tiki bar etc related 1) to the degradation visually on that lovely block of R Street, the last upgrade which took it from black asphalt/ parking lot was a neighborhood and ANC approved design - was intended to honor an architect- Wiebenson- whose later career included lending modern and timeless designs to institutions such as Martha’s Table- this result does not reflect the vision and aesthetic intended- did anyone consider contacting the Wiebenson family or associates? This was the very first example of a playing field employing drainage that considered the impact on the Chesapeake watershed- in fact a $70K grant was awarded for this innovative lead - just a sidebar

and 2) the older equipment being trashed was not economical- most of the pieces - also created by the notable Danish playground firm Komsomol- employed for this recent project- needed mere maintenance or replaced
Parts. Playgrounds by Kompan from Paris to Copenhagen last decades, meant for refurbishment and periodic upgrades- ‘natural’ material is meaningless here as all Kompan is non toxic and sealed-

PP- whoa! What does ‘well to do parents’ etc have a thing to do with anything? No one would disagree the artificial turf playing field and Poured in place rubber around equipment was due for an upgrade, regardless of socioeconomic level of the kids’ families. It is simply wasteful to have replaced all of the timeless equipment at great expense-

When parents in public schools start brag/splaining their indignence re:wasting $ they have lost site of the opportunity that exists by having your children enrolled in a public school- it is supposed to be an equal playing field across wards- notnsoecial for any particular group of parents

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The new playground is also very "advanced" in my opinion. Good for older kids, not so much littler kids. Also, those cup seat things that spin around are insane (but also fun!)

It’s not park playground, which should include toddler equipment. The students at the school are 4 to 11.

True- based on what I've seen much of it is probably too hard for a 4 year old- but totally appropriate for kids older than that. That being said, it's also not at all friendly/welcoming for kids who might have disabilities- other playgrounds have equipment that facilitates use for kids with all sorts of needs. For example, to get to any of the slides you have to climb up ropes (for the small slide) or a sheer wall that's at least 10-12 feet off the ground for the big slide. Parts of it almost looks like it was put together wrong!

Typed too fast- the examples are meant to say that the new Ross playground was not thoughtfully designed to be inclusive for kids of differing abilities.

I don't think Ross even has ramps and elevators, does it? Or wheelchair-accessible bathrooms? The tiny physical space limits what can be built there.