So Bowser is going to need a surge of hotel placements and vouchers (despite the dearth of private landlords that accept them and discrimination), all to be reflected in a TBD budget?! Meanwhile, the DC government already has plans to demo the D.C. General site next April.

It certainly reeks of secret promises to crony developers.

This fall, the District will shutter the dilapidated D.C. General family homeless shelter and end a dreary chapter in the history of homelessness in the city, Mayor Muriel Bowser said on Sunday.

According to the mayor's office, the D.C. Department of Human Services will "gradually and safely step-down the use of the hospital as a shelter" throughout 2018. Next month, the D.C. Department of General Services will "begin abatement" to prepare the facility for partial demolition, which will start in April. One building at D.C. General is already empty, and the entire property will be "vacant and closed as a family shelter this fall," the administration says.

Although DHS has recently said it intends to rely on fewer hotels for shelter, it may have to use more rooms this year for families exiting from D.C. General. Construction on the replacement shelters in Wards 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 is still underway, and a site for the Ward 1 shelter was announced only last month. Bowser's office says families will be moved from D.C. General to "permanent housing" and "other locations operated by the District" to make way for the demolition.

That may require an increase in funding for hotel placements, and for rental vouchers that enable families to afford housing on the private market once they leave shelter. This spring, Bowser will submit her budget for fiscal year 2019, which begins on Oct. 1, to the Council.

Nonetheless, because of the dearth of affordable housing in D.C., many families struggle to find decent apartments that accept vouchers. Homeless families, moreover, can face discrimination during the relocation process.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And something else to consider is what will the children be doing? All the discussion of overcrowding at Eaton shows that Ward 3 residents think homeless families only have children under 10? What about the middle school and highschoolers? What's the city plan for providing them support (many of them no doubt have one parent who is absent and possibly adjudicated), academic delays, need for meaningful after school activities etc. What the operational plan once this shelter is IN? The BEST thing the city could do is start wooing neighbors including businesses to make creative partnerships. My understanding is the apartments don't have kitchens...(not sure how that encourages independence). Is the city partnering with Giant across the street to provide healthy food? With a local restaurant to provide cooking classes? Or at they jamming it in with zero partnership or follow up. I have not seen the 'vision' for how this is going to be different from any other failed DC shelter--just smaller and geographically spread apart. I'd like to see that. As a neighbor and as a taxpayer.

On John Eaton, (1) the shelter kids have to go to school somewhere; (2) the shelter will be within the Eaton zone; (3) other area schools like Janney are overcrowded and have no room, and the shelter kids would likely feel out of place in a more demographically homogeneous environment. Eaton is already diverse. Just suck it up, Eaton. You'll be ok.

I am questioning the assumption they will all be elementary aged. Surely there will be middle and high schoolers as well who also need support and supervision - especially if mom or dad is at work or in school. And especially if they have any accompanying needs from the trauma of their family displacement and or the issues that led to it.

Still to be answered is what happens to children of families after they leave the shelter. First of all, while DC plans the shelter to be for temporary stays, left unsaid is what happens if the family unit hasn't found suitable accommodations within 6-8 months. Presumably they will stay. But even as they leave the shelter, as at-risk students, the children at Eaton will have the right to continue at Eaton if the family wishes. They also then will be in the feeder pattern for Hardy and eventually Wilson. It's unlikely that a family will be able to find affordable housing in Ward 3 after they leave the shelter. However, even if they re-locate elsewhere in the city, given the chance for their kids to attend a good elementary school and eventually a good high school, why wouldn't a parent logically consider that option? The result could be over time that, even as there's regular turnover at the shelter, the number of at-risk kids at Eaton will steadily grow. Eaton will need the resources to deal with associated specialized learning needs and to assess what this could mean for enrollment planning.

It seems odd to me to place a family for 6-8 months in a neighborhood they won't afford to live in, if the long term goal is stability. Puzzle me that, Mary Cheh.

May not afford to live in that community long term but maybe those 6-8 months of exposure to that stable environment will give them the firsthand knowledge of what sound structured communities consist of along with a few months of peace of mind and reprieve from drama and chaos that will allow them to focus on getting themselves together and get a recovery plan in order as opposed to putting them in some shithole neighborhood where they're besieged by dysfunction and drama and chaos all around them and no opportunity to exhale for a few seconds to get their lives in order because they're too busy stressing about all the shouting, sirens, shootings, etc.

You just must be kidding. You think a city run shelter in a more affordable neighborhood would be all drama dysfunction chaos sirens shooting and shouting? How much TV do you watch? You do know they are planning to build some there. Are they Doomed? And you think high ses neighborhoods are a "magic wand" and 6 months of "exposure" in a shelter there will rightsize anyone's life? It's like some sort of Swiss mountain spa? This is my real fear that this is the council and Chehs plan. Just put these families in a higher ses ward and don't worry about actually having any services. The magical air will just take its effects.??????????

This is basically like the DCPS philosophy of pretending to improve academic performance. Either put a cohort of high-achieving kids in a lackluster school, or put some high-risk kids in a higher performing school (but without the investment of resources to ensure that their learning needs are actually addressed), and viola! -- expect improving academic performance. But it usually doesn't work that way. It avoids the hard slog of improving education.

With Bowsers's decentralized shelter plan, she's never explained how the DC government -- which couldn't deliver even basic quality services to homeless families in one, centralized location -- will somehow be able to deliver better quality services in seven or eight new locations, with all of the inefficiencies and other challenges that decentralization brings.

Meanwhile developers are salivating at getting their hands on the DC General site. That may be Bowser's true plan here.

Exactly. Everything above. No need to go further. Where's the how with this, when there was no how before? I'm going to call Chehs office and read this to the bored, defensive receptionist. Well put.

I'm afraid that it's now abundantly clear that crony development is the main goal here. The news this morning is that the DC General site will be cleared out by the end of 2018, despite the fact that most of the new shelter sites will not be constructed by then.

Where are they going to put the people? For or against the Ward 3 shelter, it won't be finished by the end of this year. The earliest finish date I've seen was spring of 2019, though since they haven't even broken ground yet I sincerely doubt that's realistic.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And something else to consider is what will the children be doing? All the discussion of overcrowding at Eaton shows that Ward 3 residents think homeless families only have children under 10? What about the middle school and highschoolers? What's the city plan for providing them support (many of them no doubt have one parent who is absent and possibly adjudicated), academic delays, need for meaningful after school activities etc. What the operational plan once this shelter is IN? The BEST thing the city could do is start wooing neighbors including businesses to make creative partnerships. My understanding is the apartments don't have kitchens...(not sure how that encourages independence). Is the city partnering with Giant across the street to provide healthy food? With a local restaurant to provide cooking classes? Or at they jamming it in with zero partnership or follow up. I have not seen the 'vision' for how this is going to be different from any other failed DC shelter--just smaller and geographically spread apart. I'd like to see that. As a neighbor and as a taxpayer.

On John Eaton, (1) the shelter kids have to go to school somewhere; (2) the shelter will be within the Eaton zone; (3) other area schools like Janney are overcrowded and have no room, and the shelter kids would likely feel out of place in a more demographically homogeneous environment. Eaton is already diverse. Just suck it up, Eaton. You'll be ok.

I am questioning the assumption they will all be elementary aged. Surely there will be middle and high schoolers as well who also need support and supervision - especially if mom or dad is at work or in school. And especially if they have any accompanying needs from the trauma of their family displacement and or the issues that led to it.

Still to be answered is what happens to children of families after they leave the shelter. First of all, while DC plans the shelter to be for temporary stays, left unsaid is what happens if the family unit hasn't found suitable accommodations within 6-8 months. Presumably they will stay. But even as they leave the shelter, as at-risk students, the children at Eaton will have the right to continue at Eaton if the family wishes. They also then will be in the feeder pattern for Hardy and eventually Wilson. It's unlikely that a family will be able to find affordable housing in Ward 3 after they leave the shelter. However, even if they re-locate elsewhere in the city, given the chance for their kids to attend a good elementary school and eventually a good high school, why wouldn't a parent logically consider that option? The result could be over time that, even as there's regular turnover at the shelter, the number of at-risk kids at Eaton will steadily grow. Eaton will need the resources to deal with associated specialized learning needs and to assess what this could mean for enrollment planning.

It seems odd to me to place a family for 6-8 months in a neighborhood they won't afford to live in, if the long term goal is stability. Puzzle me that, Mary Cheh.

May not afford to live in that community long term but maybe those 6-8 months of exposure to that stable environment will give them the firsthand knowledge of what sound structured communities consist of along with a few months of peace of mind and reprieve from drama and chaos that will allow them to focus on getting themselves together and get a recovery plan in order as opposed to putting them in some shithole neighborhood where they're besieged by dysfunction and drama and chaos all around them and no opportunity to exhale for a few seconds to get their lives in order because they're too busy stressing about all the shouting, sirens, shootings, etc.

You just must be kidding. You think a city run shelter in a more affordable neighborhood would be all drama dysfunction chaos sirens shooting and shouting? How much TV do you watch? You do know they are planning to build some there. Are they Doomed? And you think high ses neighborhoods are a "magic wand" and 6 months of "exposure" in a shelter there will rightsize anyone's life? It's like some sort of Swiss mountain spa? This is my real fear that this is the council and Chehs plan. Just put these families in a higher ses ward and don't worry about actually having any services. The magical air will just take its effects.??????????

This is basically like the DCPS philosophy of pretending to improve academic performance. Either put a cohort of high-achieving kids in a lackluster school, or put some high-risk kids in a higher performing school (but without the investment of resources to ensure that their learning needs are actually addressed), and viola! -- expect improving academic performance. But it usually doesn't work that way. It avoids the hard slog of improving education.

With Bowsers's decentralized shelter plan, she's never explained how the DC government -- which couldn't deliver even basic quality services to homeless families in one, centralized location -- will somehow be able to deliver better quality services in seven or eight new locations, with all of the inefficiencies and other challenges that decentralization brings.

Meanwhile developers are salivating at getting their hands on the DC General site. That may be Bowser's true plan here.

Exactly. Everything above. No need to go further. Where's the how with this, when there was no how before? I'm going to call Chehs office and read this to the bored, defensive receptionist. Well put.

I'm afraid that it's now abundantly clear that crony development is the main goal here. The news this morning is that the DC General site will be cleared out by the end of 2018, despite the fact that most of the new shelter sites will not be constructed by then.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And something else to consider is what will the children be doing? All the discussion of overcrowding at Eaton shows that Ward 3 residents think homeless families only have children under 10? What about the middle school and highschoolers? What's the city plan for providing them support (many of them no doubt have one parent who is absent and possibly adjudicated), academic delays, need for meaningful after school activities etc. What the operational plan once this shelter is IN? The BEST thing the city could do is start wooing neighbors including businesses to make creative partnerships. My understanding is the apartments don't have kitchens...(not sure how that encourages independence). Is the city partnering with Giant across the street to provide healthy food? With a local restaurant to provide cooking classes? Or at they jamming it in with zero partnership or follow up. I have not seen the 'vision' for how this is going to be different from any other failed DC shelter--just smaller and geographically spread apart. I'd like to see that. As a neighbor and as a taxpayer.

On John Eaton, (1) the shelter kids have to go to school somewhere; (2) the shelter will be within the Eaton zone; (3) other area schools like Janney are overcrowded and have no room, and the shelter kids would likely feel out of place in a more demographically homogeneous environment. Eaton is already diverse. Just suck it up, Eaton. You'll be ok.

I am questioning the assumption they will all be elementary aged. Surely there will be middle and high schoolers as well who also need support and supervision - especially if mom or dad is at work or in school. And especially if they have any accompanying needs from the trauma of their family displacement and or the issues that led to it.

Still to be answered is what happens to children of families after they leave the shelter. First of all, while DC plans the shelter to be for temporary stays, left unsaid is what happens if the family unit hasn't found suitable accommodations within 6-8 months. Presumably they will stay. But even as they leave the shelter, as at-risk students, the children at Eaton will have the right to continue at Eaton if the family wishes. They also then will be in the feeder pattern for Hardy and eventually Wilson. It's unlikely that a family will be able to find affordable housing in Ward 3 after they leave the shelter. However, even if they re-locate elsewhere in the city, given the chance for their kids to attend a good elementary school and eventually a good high school, why wouldn't a parent logically consider that option? The result could be over time that, even as there's regular turnover at the shelter, the number of at-risk kids at Eaton will steadily grow. Eaton will need the resources to deal with associated specialized learning needs and to assess what this could mean for enrollment planning.

It seems odd to me to place a family for 6-8 months in a neighborhood they won't afford to live in, if the long term goal is stability. Puzzle me that, Mary Cheh.

May not afford to live in that community long term but maybe those 6-8 months of exposure to that stable environment will give them the firsthand knowledge of what sound structured communities consist of along with a few months of peace of mind and reprieve from drama and chaos that will allow them to focus on getting themselves together and get a recovery plan in order as opposed to putting them in some shithole neighborhood where they're besieged by dysfunction and drama and chaos all around them and no opportunity to exhale for a few seconds to get their lives in order because they're too busy stressing about all the shouting, sirens, shootings, etc.

You just must be kidding. You think a city run shelter in a more affordable neighborhood would be all drama dysfunction chaos sirens shooting and shouting? How much TV do you watch? You do know they are planning to build some there. Are they Doomed? And you think high ses neighborhoods are a "magic wand" and 6 months of "exposure" in a shelter there will rightsize anyone's life? It's like some sort of Swiss mountain spa? This is my real fear that this is the council and Chehs plan. Just put these families in a higher ses ward and don't worry about actually having any services. The magical air will just take its effects.??????????

This is basically like the DCPS philosophy of pretending to improve academic performance. Either put a cohort of high-achieving kids in a lackluster school, or put some high-risk kids in a higher performing school (but without the investment of resources to ensure that their learning needs are actually addressed), and viola! -- expect improving academic performance. But it usually doesn't work that way. It avoids the hard slog of improving education.

With Bowsers's decentralized shelter plan, she's never explained how the DC government -- which couldn't deliver even basic quality services to homeless families in one, centralized location -- will somehow be able to deliver better quality services in seven or eight new locations, with all of the inefficiencies and other challenges that decentralization brings.

Meanwhile developers are salivating at getting their hands on the DC General site. That may be Bowser's true plan here.

Exactly. Everything above. No need to go further. Where's the how with this, when there was no how before? I'm going to call Chehs office and read this to the bored, defensive receptionist. Well put.

I think cathedral. Commons is nice. It's not massive and stayed in scale (unlike the shelter /parking lot) which got all the variances it wanted unlike normal building processes. CC did everything right. The new giant is nicer than the old and the restaurants are very nice. Are you the big puppet crowd who protest in front of world Bank? Why the hate for businesses like CC or Giant? Would we be better off if they fail? Tell that to their employees. DC liberal reasoning is so bizarre to me.

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the Homeless Shelter at Cathedral Commons in this super-cloying video that speaks of Cathedral Commons' "Ahh-fluent" "rich" and "Prom-inent" setting, and that it's "Washington's premier residential and retail address."

https://vimeo.com/13018930

My reaction is how different the video looks from what Cathedral Commons actually built. Where are the brick sidewalks? The bio-retention planter areas? All of the trees? The fountains? The awnings and architectural detail? The underground utilities? Instead, they built boring, flat buildings with grey concrete surfaces, limited green space, a few, scrawny trees, no large fountains, and heavy above-ground poles and wires along Idaho.

Come to think of it, the shelter will fit right in.

Anonymous wrote:7-11 is probably the closest convenience store to DC General shelter ( there are not many restaurants or retail within close walking distance to the shelter, so the 7-11 gets a lot of foot traffic). Unfortunately folks just throw their trash on the ground along the walk back to the shelter. Also sad to see many people fighting/yelling/cursing at the top of their lungs at each other while walking along pushing their baby/toddler in the stroller. distributing across the city will hopefully help people in need get better services than they are getting at DCG and access to more food & retail options in close walking distance.

Somehow I don't see the Ward 3 shelter residents lining up for the $40 deluxe bento box at Raku.

7-11 is probably the closest convenience store to DC General shelter ( there are not many restaurants or retail within close walking distance to the shelter, so the 7-11 gets a lot of foot traffic). Unfortunately folks just throw their trash on the ground along the walk back to the shelter. Also sad to see many people fighting/yelling/cursing at the top of their lungs at each other while walking along pushing their baby/toddler in the stroller. distributing across the city will hopefully help people in need get better services than they are getting at DCG and access to more food & retail options in close walking distance.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the Homeless Shelter at Cathedral Commons in this super-cloying video that speaks of Cathedral Commons' "Ahh-fluent" "rich" and "Prom-inent" setting, and that it's "Washington's premier residential and retail address."

https://vimeo.com/13018930

Yuck. The video is pretentious, grasping and treacly. I think I need to take a shower.

Clueless and tacky, actually. They seem to forget that the anchor tenant isn't Whole Foods or Wegmans, but a Giant.

And did Cathedral Commons rip off the Chanel logo?! It sure appears that way.

Anonymous wrote:Nothing about the Homeless Shelter at Cathedral Commons in this super-cloying video that speaks of Cathedral Commons' "Ahh-fluent" "rich" and "Prom-inent" setting, and that it's "Washington's premier residential and retail address."

https://vimeo.com/13018930

Yuck. The video is pretentious, grasping and treacly. I think I need to take a shower.

Also parents at Cathedral Close schools not too excited...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And something else to consider is what will the children be doing? All the discussion of overcrowding at Eaton shows that Ward 3 residents think homeless families only have children under 10? What about the middle school and highschoolers? What's the city plan for providing them support (many of them no doubt have one parent who is absent and possibly adjudicated), academic delays, need for meaningful after school activities etc. What the operational plan once this shelter is IN? The BEST thing the city could do is start wooing neighbors including businesses to make creative partnerships. My understanding is the apartments don't have kitchens...(not sure how that encourages independence). Is the city partnering with Giant across the street to provide healthy food? With a local restaurant to provide cooking classes? Or at they jamming it in with zero partnership or follow up. I have not seen the 'vision' for how this is going to be different from any other failed DC shelter--just smaller and geographically spread apart. I'd like to see that. As a neighbor and as a taxpayer.

On John Eaton, (1) the shelter kids have to go to school somewhere; (2) the shelter will be within the Eaton zone; (3) other area schools like Janney are overcrowded and have no room, and the shelter kids would likely feel out of place in a more demographically homogeneous environment. Eaton is already diverse. Just suck it up, Eaton. You'll be ok.

I am questioning the assumption they will all be elementary aged. Surely there will be middle and high schoolers as well who also need support and supervision - especially if mom or dad is at work or in school. And especially if they have any accompanying needs from the trauma of their family displacement and or the issues that led to it.

Still to be answered is what happens to children of families after they leave the shelter. First of all, while DC plans the shelter to be for temporary stays, left unsaid is what happens if the family unit hasn't found suitable accommodations within 6-8 months. Presumably they will stay. But even as they leave the shelter, as at-risk students, the children at Eaton will have the right to continue at Eaton if the family wishes. They also then will be in the feeder pattern for Hardy and eventually Wilson. It's unlikely that a family will be able to find affordable housing in Ward 3 after they leave the shelter. However, even if they re-locate elsewhere in the city, given the chance for their kids to attend a good elementary school and eventually a good high school, why wouldn't a parent logically consider that option? The result could be over time that, even as there's regular turnover at the shelter, the number of at-risk kids at Eaton will steadily grow. Eaton will need the resources to deal with associated specialized learning needs and to assess what this could mean for enrollment planning.

It seems odd to me to place a family for 6-8 months in a neighborhood they won't afford to live in, if the long term goal is stability. Puzzle me that, Mary Cheh.

May not afford to live in that community long term but maybe those 6-8 months of exposure to that stable environment will give them the firsthand knowledge of what sound structured communities consist of along with a few months of peace of mind and reprieve from drama and chaos that will allow them to focus on getting themselves together and get a recovery plan in order as opposed to putting them in some shithole neighborhood where they're besieged by dysfunction and drama and chaos all around them and no opportunity to exhale for a few seconds to get their lives in order because they're too busy stressing about all the shouting, sirens, shootings, etc.

You just must be kidding. You think a city run shelter in a more affordable neighborhood would be all drama dysfunction chaos sirens shooting and shouting? How much TV do you watch? You do know they are planning to build some there. Are they Doomed? And you think high ses neighborhoods are a "magic wand" and 6 months of "exposure" in a shelter there will rightsize anyone's life? It's like some sort of Swiss mountain spa? This is my real fear that this is the council and Chehs plan. Just put these families in a higher ses ward and don't worry about actually having any services. The magical air will just take its effects.??????????

This is basically like the DCPS philosophy of pretending to improve academic performance. Either put a cohort of high-achieving kids in a lackluster school, or put some high-risk kids in a higher performing school (but without the investment of resources to ensure that their learning needs are actually addressed), and viola! -- expect improving academic performance. But it usually doesn't work that way. It avoids the hard slog of improving education.

With Bowsers's decentralized shelter plan, she's never explained how the DC government -- which couldn't deliver even basic quality services to homeless families in one, centralized location -- will somehow be able to deliver better quality services in seven or eight new locations, with all of the inefficiencies and other challenges that decentralization brings.

Meanwhile developers are salivating at getting their hands on the DC General site. That may be Bowser's true plan here.

You can keep making this inane point on here and I will keep posting the same response - it will be a big net positive for the city and the neighborhood around DC General if developers get their hands on the DC General site and re-develop it into something productive that creates housing and generates tax revenues for the City. Do you want to take the time to respond and explain why that is bad? Since you live in Ward 3 and strike me as an insecure NIMBY you should be yelling and screaming as loud as you can from your in-fill balcony in McLean Gardens for the city to do this since you would probably fight new housing in your own neighborhood.

It's the Cathedral Commons town center residents and retailers who are pissed about the W3 shelter. Some residents are paying $9000/month to rent a townhouse across the street from the homeless shelter. They can move, of course, when their leases end. But the retailer and restaurant leases are longer term. Probably it's the CC investors who have been screwed the most, but then they're not exactly sympathy cases.

As for the DC General site, everyone knows that Bowser is beholden to certain Big Development interests. No surprise there.

Let me ask again since you can't seem to answer the question - why is it a bad thing if DC General gets re-developed?

BTW I'm curious what retailers are pissed about the shelter? I missed them at the public meetings - there are plenty of high end retailers thriving downtown in higher rent areas where there are many more homeless around, including the hard core long term homeless you are so terrified are going to pore into McLean gardens and ruin the value of your condo.

Nothing about the Homeless Shelter at Cathedral Commons in this super-cloying video that speaks of Cathedral Commons' "Ahh-fluent" "rich" and "Prom-inent" setting, and that it's "Washington's premier residential and retail address."

https://vimeo.com/13018930

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And something else to consider is what will the children be doing? All the discussion of overcrowding at Eaton shows that Ward 3 residents think homeless families only have children under 10? What about the middle school and highschoolers? What's the city plan for providing them support (many of them no doubt have one parent who is absent and possibly adjudicated), academic delays, need for meaningful after school activities etc. What the operational plan once this shelter is IN? The BEST thing the city could do is start wooing neighbors including businesses to make creative partnerships. My understanding is the apartments don't have kitchens...(not sure how that encourages independence). Is the city partnering with Giant across the street to provide healthy food? With a local restaurant to provide cooking classes? Or at they jamming it in with zero partnership or follow up. I have not seen the 'vision' for how this is going to be different from any other failed DC shelter--just smaller and geographically spread apart. I'd like to see that. As a neighbor and as a taxpayer.

On John Eaton, (1) the shelter kids have to go to school somewhere; (2) the shelter will be within the Eaton zone; (3) other area schools like Janney are overcrowded and have no room, and the shelter kids would likely feel out of place in a more demographically homogeneous environment. Eaton is already diverse. Just suck it up, Eaton. You'll be ok.

I am questioning the assumption they will all be elementary aged. Surely there will be middle and high schoolers as well who also need support and supervision - especially if mom or dad is at work or in school. And especially if they have any accompanying needs from the trauma of their family displacement and or the issues that led to it.

Still to be answered is what happens to children of families after they leave the shelter. First of all, while DC plans the shelter to be for temporary stays, left unsaid is what happens if the family unit hasn't found suitable accommodations within 6-8 months. Presumably they will stay. But even as they leave the shelter, as at-risk students, the children at Eaton will have the right to continue at Eaton if the family wishes. They also then will be in the feeder pattern for Hardy and eventually Wilson. It's unlikely that a family will be able to find affordable housing in Ward 3 after they leave the shelter. However, even if they re-locate elsewhere in the city, given the chance for their kids to attend a good elementary school and eventually a good high school, why wouldn't a parent logically consider that option? The result could be over time that, even as there's regular turnover at the shelter, the number of at-risk kids at Eaton will steadily grow. Eaton will need the resources to deal with associated specialized learning needs and to assess what this could mean for enrollment planning.

It seems odd to me to place a family for 6-8 months in a neighborhood they won't afford to live in, if the long term goal is stability. Puzzle me that, Mary Cheh.

May not afford to live in that community long term but maybe those 6-8 months of exposure to that stable environment will give them the firsthand knowledge of what sound structured communities consist of along with a few months of peace of mind and reprieve from drama and chaos that will allow them to focus on getting themselves together and get a recovery plan in order as opposed to putting them in some shithole neighborhood where they're besieged by dysfunction and drama and chaos all around them and no opportunity to exhale for a few seconds to get their lives in order because they're too busy stressing about all the shouting, sirens, shootings, etc.

You just must be kidding. You think a city run shelter in a more affordable neighborhood would be all drama dysfunction chaos sirens shooting and shouting? How much TV do you watch? You do know they are planning to build some there. Are they Doomed? And you think high ses neighborhoods are a "magic wand" and 6 months of "exposure" in a shelter there will rightsize anyone's life? It's like some sort of Swiss mountain spa? This is my real fear that this is the council and Chehs plan. Just put these families in a higher ses ward and don't worry about actually having any services. The magical air will just take its effects.??????????

This is basically like the DCPS philosophy of pretending to improve academic performance. Either put a cohort of high-achieving kids in a lackluster school, or put some high-risk kids in a higher performing school (but without the investment of resources to ensure that their learning needs are actually addressed), and viola! -- expect improving academic performance. But it usually doesn't work that way. It avoids the hard slog of improving education.

With Bowsers's decentralized shelter plan, she's never explained how the DC government -- which couldn't deliver even basic quality services to homeless families in one, centralized location -- will somehow be able to deliver better quality services in seven or eight new locations, with all of the inefficiencies and other challenges that decentralization brings.

Meanwhile developers are salivating at getting their hands on the DC General site. That may be Bowser's true plan here.

You can keep making this inane point on here and I will keep posting the same response - it will be a big net positive for the city and the neighborhood around DC General if developers get their hands on the DC General site and re-develop it into something productive that creates housing and generates tax revenues for the City. Do you want to take the time to respond and explain why that is bad? Since you live in Ward 3 and strike me as an insecure NIMBY you should be yelling and screaming as loud as you can from your in-fill balcony in McLean Gardens for the city to do this since you would probably fight new housing in your own neighborhood.

It's the Cathedral Commons town center residents and retailers who are pissed about the W3 shelter. Some residents are paying $9000/month to rent a townhouse across the street from the homeless shelter. They can move, of course, when their leases end. But the retailer and restaurant leases are longer term. Probably it's the CC investors who have been screwed the most, but then they're not exactly sympathy cases.

As for the DC General site, everyone knows that Bowser is beholden to certain Big Development interests. No surprise there.