Hearst Playground story in Current

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also indoor.

But it's also available year-round. It seems boneheaded to lose a playing field that is used 7 0r 8 months out of the year, as well as tennis courts that are used almost as long, for a facility that will be open (assuming adequate operating funding year to year) at most 3 months out of the year.

I don't live near Hearst so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but as a rational person I am annoyed by the argument that there has to be a pool at Hearst because there is no "outdoor pool" in "Ward 3." Indoor pools are adequate substitutes for outdoor pools. Ward boundaries are imaginary lines. It's the kind of argument you come up with if you start with the conclusion and then work backwards developing reasons.

Not to mention that with the relatively large population growth in Ward 2 over the past several years, the next ward realignment could well result in Ward 3's boundary being moved slightly south. So Jelleff might shift from Ward 2 to Ward 3, and Ward 3 will wind up with its own swimming pool after all. And basically cost free!

"Wow this is maybe the dumbest argument against a pool yet in this thread - maybe DC will be retroceeded to MD too. The point isn't to have an outdoor pool in each ward - the point is to have a pool that everyone can easily get to. Sure if you live in the southern part of Ward 3 you are sort of close to Volta today but most of Ward 3 is nowhere close to Volta or any other public swimming pools. If you live in Ward 3 you should not have to spend 50 minutes on public transportation or 25 minutes in a car getting to a DC Public swimming pool - you should have one in your neighborhood like most other DC residents have.

"


Hey "wow" you suck at math, map reading and logic. If the point isn't about getting an outdoor pool in each ward...then let's stop the discussion now. Where in Ward 3 do you live that is more than 15 minutes from Wilson and not less than 10 minutes from Volta or Jelleff. I just checked Google maps and you can drive - during rush hour - from the GDS lower school campus at the bottom of Ward 3 to Broad Branch and Western at the top of Ward 3 in 21 minutes. It's impossible to argue that Hearst is more assessable to public transportation than Wilson since it is almost a mile from any Metro stop including Cleveland Park, T-Town and Van Ness. The front door to the Wilson Pool is literally three minutes from the T-Town metro. The 30 and H buses which serve Hearst also serve Wilson.

No I don't d-bag.

Hearst is half a mile (a 7-8 minute walk in case you don't ever walk) from two Metro stations but on several major bus routes - now I'm sure you are one of those Ward 3 residents who thinks public transit begins and ends with Metrorail but as many DC residents ride the bus every day as take Metro, including in Ward 3, so I can assure you the bus is public transit.

I'm walking distance to Wilson but it is an indoor pool so that is an irrelevant reference but perhaps you've never been there as well - if you are Hearst neighbor that would hardly be a surprise.

And no way can I get to Volta in 15 minutes and I know because my sons had years of Little League games there and we always left 30 minutes before the games - 20 minutes of driving and an extra 10 minutes to find parking and that is on the weekend and Volta is far less accessible to public transportation as it is several blocks from Wisconsin.

And your other attempts at shrinking the Ward are also inaccurate and irrelevant - what relevance is the trip time from one corner of Ward 3 to the other? The relevant measure is how convenient is the proposed pool to as many DC residents as possible and Hearst is a great location for the Ward and even residents from other parts of the city.

But the more important point is I want an outdoor pool in my neighborhood that my now older kids can get to on their own relatively quickly and where they can meet up with their friends from the neighborhood. The private school crowd from CP that is fighting this probably has zero sense of that because their kids gather by social class and not neighborhood but lots of us in Ward 3 would like to have some outdoor spaces in our neighborhood where our kids can conveniently congregate in the summer.

[Anonymous]

I would retort or defend two points.

1) people from other neighborhoods and wards don't need to come to Hearst. There are plenty of outdoor pools that communities and residents city wide are able to enjoy;

2) The PPs fighting this are really discounting the community aspect of this proposal. Yes, the dog park provides a little bit of a gathering for people who have dogs, and the toddler lot helps community for people who have little kids, but for adults and older kids and younger kids, an outdoor pool provides a fantastic opportunity for people who live throughout the neighborhood to gather during the warmer months. This is not something that happens because Stoddert uses the field, or because a handful of people play tennis or at the Wilson indoor pool.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also indoor.

But it's also available year-round. It seems boneheaded to lose a playing field that is used 7 0r 8 months out of the year, as well as tennis courts that are used almost as long, for a facility that will be open (assuming adequate operating funding year to year) at most 3 months out of the year.

I don't live near Hearst so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but as a rational person I am annoyed by the argument that there has to be a pool at Hearst because there is no "outdoor pool" in "Ward 3." Indoor pools are adequate substitutes for outdoor pools. Ward boundaries are imaginary lines. It's the kind of argument you come up with if you start with the conclusion and then work backwards developing reasons.

Not to mention that with the relatively large population growth in Ward 2 over the past several years, the next ward realignment could well result in Ward 3's boundary being moved slightly south. So Jelleff might shift from Ward 2 to Ward 3, and Ward 3 will wind up with its own swimming pool after all. And basically cost free!

Wow this is maybe the dumbest argument against a pool yet in this thread - maybe DC will be retroceeded to MD too. The point isn't to have an outdoor pool in each ward - the point is to have a pool that everyone can easily get to. Sure if you live in the southern part of Ward 3 you are sort of close to Volta today but most of Ward 3 is nowhere close to Volta or any other public swimming pools. If you live in Ward 3 you should not have to spend 50 minutes on public transportation or 25 minutes in a car getting to a DC Public swimming pool - you should have one in your neighborhood like most other DC residents have.

It's the pool boosters who have been making the argument that Ward 3 needs an outdoor pool. It's a dumb argument.

A more convincing argument would be to say that DPR wants every DC resident to be within X miles of a pool, and a pool at Hearst would mean that Y thousands of households who currently don't live that close to a public pool would now have one. That's a rational argument -- and it's a lot more thoughtful than "Ward 3 needs an outdoor pool." But it requires thoughtful analysis, which seems to be in short supply at DPR.

Isn't that exactly what 17:14 said?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also indoor.

But it's also available year-round. It seems boneheaded to lose a playing field that is used 7 0r 8 months out of the year, as well as tennis courts that are used almost as long, for a facility that will be open (assuming adequate operating funding year to year) at most 3 months out of the year.

I don't live near Hearst so I don't really have a dog in the fight, but as a rational person I am annoyed by the argument that there has to be a pool at Hearst because there is no "outdoor pool" in "Ward 3." Indoor pools are adequate substitutes for outdoor pools. Ward boundaries are imaginary lines. It's the kind of argument you come up with if you start with the conclusion and then work backwards developing reasons.

Not to mention that with the relatively large population growth in Ward 2 over the past several years, the next ward realignment could well result in Ward 3's boundary being moved slightly south. So Jelleff might shift from Ward 2 to Ward 3, and Ward 3 will wind up with its own swimming pool after all. And basically cost free!

Wow this is maybe the dumbest argument against a pool yet in this thread - maybe DC will be retroceeded to MD too. The point isn't to have an outdoor pool in each ward - the point is to have a pool that everyone can easily get to. Sure if you live in the southern part of Ward 3 you are sort of close to Volta today but most of Ward 3 is nowhere close to Volta or any other public swimming pools. If you live in Ward 3 you should not have to spend 50 minutes on public transportation or 25 minutes in a car getting to a DC Public swimming pool - you should have one in your neighborhood like most other DC residents have.

It's the pool boosters who have been making the argument that Ward 3 needs an outdoor pool. It's a dumb argument.

A more convincing argument would be to say that DPR wants every DC resident to be within X miles of a pool, and a pool at Hearst would mean that Y thousands of households who currently don't live that close to a public pool would now have one. That's a rational argument -- and it's a lot more thoughtful than "Ward 3 needs an outdoor pool." But it requires thoughtful analysis, which seems to be in short supply at DPR.

In fairness to DPR staff, they will say candidly in conversation (and basically said publicly) that they had nothing to do with choosing Hearst Park as the site for an outdoor pool, pool house, etc. That's all on Cheh. The analysis, to the extent that there's been anything meaningful, doesn't support Hearst as the best site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would retort or defend two points.

1) people from other neighborhoods and wards don't need to come to Hearst. There are plenty of outdoor pools that communities and residents city wide are able to enjoy;

2) The PPs fighting this are really discounting the community aspect of this proposal. Yes, the dog park provides a little bit of a gathering for people who have dogs, and the toddler lot helps community for people who have little kids, but for adults and older kids and younger kids, an outdoor pool provides a fantastic opportunity for people who live throughout the neighborhood to gather during the warmer months. This is not something that happens because Stoddert uses the field, or because a handful of people play tennis or at the Wilson indoor pool.

We don't need to pave Hearst park to create a "community gathering spot." The park gets lots of community use, parents with kids on the playground, soccer players, tennis players, people just enjoying a cool green space that is a level removed from city streets. It would be a shame to lose much of that. Wasn't Cathedral Commons sold as a community gathering spot, too?!

[Anonymous]

No I don't d-bag.

Hearst is half a mile (a 7-8 minute walk in case you don't ever walk) from two Metro stations but on several major bus routes - now I'm sure you are one of those Ward 3 residents who thinks public transit begins and ends with Metrorail but as many DC residents ride the bus every day as take Metro, including in Ward 3, so I can assure you the bus is public transit.

I'm walking distance to Wilson but it is an indoor pool so that is an irrelevant reference but perhaps you've never been there as well - if you are Hearst neighbor that would hardly be a surprise.

And no way can I get to Volta in 15 minutes and I know because my sons had years of Little League games there and we always left 30 minutes before the games - 20 minutes of driving and an extra 10 minutes to find parking and that is on the weekend and Volta is far less accessible to public transportation as it is several blocks from Wisconsin.

And your other attempts at shrinking the Ward are also inaccurate and irrelevant - what relevance is the trip time from one corner of Ward 3 to the other? The relevant measure is how convenient is the proposed pool to as many DC residents as possible and Hearst is a great location for the Ward and even residents from other parts of the city.

But the more important point is I want an outdoor pool in my neighborhood that my now older kids can get to on their own relatively quickly and where they can meet up with their friends from the neighborhood. The private school crowd from CP that is fighting this probably has zero sense of that because their kids gather by social class and not neighborhood but lots of us in Ward 3 would like to have some outdoor spaces in our neighborhood where our kids can conveniently congregate in the summer.

I should have realized your m.o., with the first line of your line of your invective, but trying to dismiss those who want to save Hearst as the "private school crowd from CP" is not only divisive, it's inaccurate. (Admittedly a naked resort to "class" resentment is perhaps the best one can do, as it's hard to play the DC race card when the appeal is for a Ward 3 pool!) In fact, because no one has come forward with even preliminary a site plan, Hearst school parents, as much if not more than the "private school crowd," are concerned that a pool might be built too close to the school yard or that the upper playground will be lost.

[Anonymous]

"No I don't d-bag."

Seriously? Does name calling really help your cause? Does it make you seem more rational, your arguments better reasoned?

Spending millions and millions of taxpayer dollars to build a pool and cover a natural field with synthetic turf is a big deal. Folks have right to debate this issue. There are good people on both sides of this issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No I don't d-bag.

Hearst is half a mile (a 7-8 minute walk in case you don't ever walk) from two Metro stations but on several major bus routes - now I'm sure you are one of those Ward 3 residents who thinks public transit begins and ends with Metrorail but as many DC residents ride the bus every day as take Metro, including in Ward 3, so I can assure you the bus is public transit.

I'm walking distance to Wilson but it is an indoor pool so that is an irrelevant reference but perhaps you've never been there as well - if you are Hearst neighbor that would hardly be a surprise.

And no way can I get to Volta in 15 minutes and I know because my sons had years of Little League games there and we always left 30 minutes before the games - 20 minutes of driving and an extra 10 minutes to find parking and that is on the weekend and Volta is far less accessible to public transportation as it is several blocks from Wisconsin.

And your other attempts at shrinking the Ward are also inaccurate and irrelevant - what relevance is the trip time from one corner of Ward 3 to the other? The relevant measure is how convenient is the proposed pool to as many DC residents as possible and Hearst is a great location for the Ward and even residents from other parts of the city.

But the more important point is I want an outdoor pool in my neighborhood that my now older kids can get to on their own relatively quickly and where they can meet up with their friends from the neighborhood. The private school crowd from CP that is fighting this probably has zero sense of that because their kids gather by social class and not neighborhood but lots of us in Ward 3 would like to have some outdoor spaces in our neighborhood where our kids can conveniently congregate in the summer.

I should have realized your m.o., with the first line of your line of your invective, but trying to dismiss those who want to save Hearst as the "private school crowd from CP" is not only divisive, it's inaccurate. (Admittedly a naked resort to "class" resentment is perhaps the best one can do, as it's hard to play the DC race card when the appeal is for a Ward 3 pool!) In fact, because no one has come forward with even preliminary a site plan, Hearst school parents, as much if not more than the "private school crowd," are concerned that a pool might be built too close to the school yard or that the upper playground will be lost.

I have yet to hear a single Hearst school parent express concern that they might get an outdoor pool. Some would like a portion of the money to provide some shade for the upper playground, and some to help fix up the historic DPR cottage. But if there are folks railing against the pool, they are pretty quiet.

[Anonymous]

The Hearst parent community that I have spoken to are pretty much in favor of a pool. But then again, most of us live in the neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

The pool will only be open eight to ten hours a day, three months a year - several DC public pools are already shut down. The rest of the time it will be an attractive hazard surrounded by a very high fence with a locked gate. It will remove up to two acres of public space from public use for the remaining nine months of the year.

The pool will require paid professionals to be present when it is in use. The entire park is open to the public all day long 365 days a year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The pool will only be open eight to ten hours a day, three months a year - several DC public pools are already shut down. The rest of the time it will be an attractive hazard surrounded by a very high fence with a locked gate. It will remove up to two acres of public space from public use for the remaining nine months of the year.

The pool will require paid professionals to be present when it is in use. The entire park is open to the public all day long 365 days a year.

Some of what you say may, or may not be true. Despite that, don't you think the pool proponents know that and yet still support it?

[Anonymous]

"Some of what you say may, or may not be true. Despite that, don't you think the pool proponents know that and yet still support it?"

Are you one of those people who doesn't like information when making a decision?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

No I don't d-bag.

Hearst is half a mile (a 7-8 minute walk in case you don't ever walk) from two Metro stations but on several major bus routes - now I'm sure you are one of those Ward 3 residents who thinks public transit begins and ends with Metrorail but as many DC residents ride the bus every day as take Metro, including in Ward 3, so I can assure you the bus is public transit.

I'm walking distance to Wilson but it is an indoor pool so that is an irrelevant reference but perhaps you've never been there as well - if you are Hearst neighbor that would hardly be a surprise.

And no way can I get to Volta in 15 minutes and I know because my sons had years of Little League games there and we always left 30 minutes before the games - 20 minutes of driving and an extra 10 minutes to find parking and that is on the weekend and Volta is far less accessible to public transportation as it is several blocks from Wisconsin.

And your other attempts at shrinking the Ward are also inaccurate and irrelevant - what relevance is the trip time from one corner of Ward 3 to the other? The relevant measure is how convenient is the proposed pool to as many DC residents as possible and Hearst is a great location for the Ward and even residents from other parts of the city.

But the more important point is I want an outdoor pool in my neighborhood that my now older kids can get to on their own relatively quickly and where they can meet up with their friends from the neighborhood. The private school crowd from CP that is fighting this probably has zero sense of that because their kids gather by social class and not neighborhood but lots of us in Ward 3 would like to have some outdoor spaces in our neighborhood where our kids can conveniently congregate in the summer.

I should have realized your m.o., with the first line of your line of your invective, but trying to dismiss those who want to save Hearst as the "private school crowd from CP" is not only divisive, it's inaccurate. (Admittedly a naked resort to "class" resentment is perhaps the best one can do, as it's hard to play the DC race card when the appeal is for a Ward 3 pool!) In fact, because no one has come forward with even preliminary a site plan, Hearst school parents, as much if not more than the "private school crowd," are concerned that a pool might be built too close to the school yard or that the upper playground will be lost.

can the Hearst upper playground be moved to where the trailer used to be?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Hearst parent community that I have spoken to are pretty much in favor of a pool. But then again, most of us live in the neighborhood.

No one wants to lose the upper playground to a pool (which would also put it closer to the school facilities). That would be an unacceptable siting outcome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The pool will only be open eight to ten hours a day, three months a year - several DC public pools are already shut down. The rest of the time it will be an attractive hazard surrounded by a very high fence with a locked gate. It will remove up to two acres of public space from public use for the remaining nine months of the year.

The pool will require paid professionals to be present when it is in use. The entire park is open to the public all day long 365 days a year.

The question is: which two acres of this 4+/- acre park will be altered and fenced off? That's pretty important to understand.